Democrats Vote Against Gun Control in Surprise Move
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A gun control measure in Hawaii failed by a narrow vote this week, after several state Democrats crossed the aisle to vote against it.
The defeat of Senate Bill 401, which sought to ban assault-style rifles in the state, shows an unexpected division in a party typically unified on gun control.
Kainoa Kaku, president of the Hawaii Rifle Association, checking one of his personal firearms while at his home, June, 23, 2022, in Honolulu. This is not the sort of firearm which was protected by the...
Kainoa Kaku, president of the Hawaii Rifle Association, checking one of his personal firearms while at his home, June, 23, 2022, in Honolulu. This is not the sort of firearm which was protected by the recent ruling. More
Marco Garcia, File/AP Photo
Why It Matters
The vote marks a rare instance of Democratic lawmakers breaking with their party on a high-profile gun measure, especially as Democratic Governor Josh Green was prepared to sign the bill if it passed through the Senate.
Assault rifles such as AR-15s and AK-47s are the types of guns which have been used in some of the most high-profile school shootings. They will remain legal in Hawaii for now, although assault pistols are not legal in the state.
What To Know
On Wednesday, the state Senate blocked the bill after some Democrats raised concerns about its effects on gun owners.
Hawaii state Senator Joy Buenaventura, who is typically a supporter of gun control measures, said the bill would criminalize existing owners of assault rifles, per Hawaii News Now.
She said: "Now, by their mere possession, because we decide to pass this bill, we decide to label them as criminals and that to me, it's unethical and should not be tolerated by this body."
However, Senate Judiciary chair Karl Rhoads disagreed with this take on the bill saying it allowed for "grandfathering."
He supported the bill saying its prohibition on the number of bullets a gun can fire at a time would limit fatalities in the event of a shooting, and would allow the police to get to the scene before more people could be killed.
The bill also made it illegal for guns to be given to anyone who did not purchase them directly. The gun used in the most recent fatal school shooting at Florida State University did not belong to the chief suspect.
The bill failed in a 13-12 vote, which not only went against typical Democratic positions, but also countered Hawaiian polling which shows 75 percent of Hawaiians support a ban on military-grade rifles.
Assault style weapons and hand guns for sale at Capitol City Arms Supply on Jan. 16, 2013, in Springfield, Illinois.
Assault style weapons and hand guns for sale at Capitol City Arms Supply on Jan. 16, 2013, in Springfield, Illinois.
Seth Perlman, File/AP Photo
What People Are Saying
Erica Yamauchi, a volunteer with the Hawaii chapter of the gun control advocacy group Moms Demand Action, said in a statement: "Today, lawmakers had an opportunity to right a wrong—instead they doubled down by allowing the weapon of choice for mass shooters to continue to be sold across our islands. Whenever tragedy strikes next, we'll ask ourselves what could have we done to prevent it. That moment of reckoning? It was right now. The answer was passing SB 401. Instead, Senate lawmakers caved to the pressure of the gun lobby and our communities will pay the price."
Democrat State Senator Joy Buenaventura said on the Senate floor: "But we are actually making [gun owners] criminals by possession of magazines that we had legalized before they bought it. Now, by their mere possession, because we decide to pass this bill, we decide to label them as criminals and that to me, it's unethical and should not be tolerated by this body."
What Happens Next
While Hawaii Democrats voted against this gun control measure, Democrats in the Senate in Washington DC introduced a federal Assault Weapons Ban of 2025. This bill will likely not go through as the Republicans control both chambers of Congress.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats need to start using AI to help save democracy
As American democracy unravels at the hands of President Trump and his enabling congressional and Supreme Court majorities, millions of Americans are desperate to identify whatever possible countermeasures remain to slow the country's descent into fascism. The outcome of the 2026 midterms is unlikely to produce meaningful change, even if the Democrats take control of the House. Without a cooperative Senate, it will be impossible either to pass legislation or secure a conviction on impeachment charges. Oversight hearings can bring public attention to things like rampant corruption, but the threats Trump poses to the rule of law and democracy are already well-known. The courts can only do so much. There's another emerging tool, however: artificial intelligence. Trump seems to understands the transformative power of AI. Last month, the administration announced an ' AI Action Plan ' for 'winning the AI race.' Among other measures, it promises to remove 'onerous Federal regulations that hinder AI development and deployment, and seek private sector input on rules to remove.' As part of this initiative, the General Services Administration and OpenAI announced earlier this month that the company will be 'providing ChatGPT to the entire U.S. federal workforce' under a 'first-of-its-kind partnership.' Participating agencies will pay a nominal cost of $1 each for the first year to enable federal employees to 'explore and leverage AI.' The company is also 'teaming up with experienced partners Slalom and Boston Consulting Group to support secure, responsible deployment and trainings.' Last week, the AI company Anthropic likewise announced it had struck the same deal with GSA to enable federal agencies' access to its Claude model. The Trump administration's effort to streamline the federal government with AI models makes some sense. Research has shown that generative AI — particularly large language models, which consume vast amounts of data to understand and generate natural language content — can enhance government efficiency in data processing, analysis and drafting, among other potential advantages. But AI systems also increase the risk of widespread government surveillance, personalized misinformation and disinformation, systematic discrimination, lack of accountability and inaccuracy. According to a recent academic paper, 'although many studies have explored the ethical implications of AI, fewer have fully examined its democratic implications.' Trump's alliance with OpenAI head Sam Altman goes back to start of his second term, when he announced a $500 billion joint venture with OpenAI, Oracle and Softbank to build up to 20 large AI data centers. Trump called the venture 'Stargate.' The deal's details are murky, including who will have access to Stargate and how it will possibly benefit taxpayers. Although a spokesman for OpenAI told Fox News Digital that 'Sam Altman sort of planted a flag on democratic AI versus autocratic AI,' let's not forget that Altman is not a government official or employee. As a legal matter, it is unclear whether these ' fast-tracked ' deals will fully comply with traditional oversight and procurement laws and procedures. No major AI company is currently approved under the Federal Risk And Authorization Management Program, for example, which is the process for authorizing the use of cloud technologies by federal agencies. According the GSA website, the program aims to ensure 'security and protection of federal information' by imposing strict cybersecurity controls to protect against data breaches, hacking and unauthorized access, and requiring ongoing monitoring and reporting. Given that the GSA is reportedly working on 'developing a separate authorization' for generative AI systems like ChatGPT and Claude, the potential threats to national security and private citizens' personal information are significant. The Trump administration's lack of transparency also risks creating a black-box government run by proprietary algorithms that the public cannot inspect — centralizing control over federal AI in two companies whose interests clearly lie in market dominance, not the public good. This is why these kinds of decisions are best made through established legal procedures — including the Federal Competition in Contracting Act (requiring fair and open competition), the Privacy Act of 1974 (limiting how agencies can collect and disclose personal data), the Federal Records Act (requiring the proper retention and archiving of public records) and the Administrative Procedure Act (requiring public comment and input into major policy decisions). For now, OpenAI has promised that its 'goal is to ensure agencies can use AI securely and responsibly. ChatGPT Enterprise already does not use business data, including inputs or outputs, to train or improve OpenAI models. The same safeguards will apply to federal use.' This promise from Altman's company is no substitute for actual legal standards enforced by the federal government. Whether AI tools embedded in federal government systems could one day be used to sway elections to favor Trump and his cronies is a vital question. For now, what's clear is that Democrats need to get into the AI game, and fast. A Democratic political action committee called the National Democratic Training Committee recently unveiled on online course entitled 'AI For Progressive Campaigns,' which is designed to teach candidates how to use AI to help create social media content, draft speeches, craft voter outreach messaging and phone-banking scripts, conduct research into their constituencies and opponents, and develop internal training materials. The founder and CEO of the group, Kelly Dietrich, stated that 'thousands of Democratic campaigns can now leverage AI to compete at any scale.' This effort, although laudable, does not go far enough to capitalize on AI's potential to help outmaneuver authoritarianism in the U.S. There's much more that might be done, including using AI to educate citizens on the benefits of democracy, how institutions work and the facts underlying important issues; to create large-scale, moderated public deliberation and consensus around divisive issues; to detect and alert the public to manipulated media, thus combatting misinformation and disinformation and fostering public trust in an alternative to Trump; and to create and implement effective messaging strategies for alternative visions for the future of the country. AI could be American voters' best friend, not their enemy. It just needs to be asked.
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Air Force chief of staff to retire after only two years in role
The Air Force's chief of staff, Gen. David Allvin, will retire this November after serving only two years of his four-year term, the service has announced, making him the latest senior military officer pushed out under the Trump administration. The Air Force revealed the surprise move in a Monday statement, noting that Allvin had 'announced plans today to retire effective on or about Nov. 1.' The release did not name a successor to be the Air Force's highest-ranking uniformed officer, adding that Allvin will continue to serve until one is confirmed by the Senate. 'I'm grateful for the opportunity to serve as the 23rd Air Force Chief of Staff and I'm thankful for [Air Force Secretary Troy Meink], [Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth] and President Trump's faith in me to lead our service,' Allvin said in a statement. 'More than anything, I'm proud to have been part of the team of Airmen who live out our core values of integrity, service and excellence every day as we prepare to defend this great nation.' The statement did not give a reason for Allvin's abrupt retirement plans, but The Washington Post reported that he was informed last week that he would be asked to retire as Hegseth wanted to go in another direction with the Air Force. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill. Allvin's looming departure follows a string of firings of other senior military officers in Trump's second term, including Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. CQ Brown — who also did not serve his full four years — Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti, Coast Guard Commandant Adm Linda Fagan, and a slew of others serving in less prominent roles. Allvin, who became Air Force chief of staff in 2023 after service as the vice chief of staff since November 2020, is a career mobility pilot with thousands of hours flying aircraft throughout his 39-year career. In February 2024, Allvin and other Air Force officials revealed a sweeping reorganization plan in a bid to prepare the U.S. for a fight against China. But Hegseth a year later ordered the Air Force to hold off on its changes to the service and its structure. In addition, the Pentagon chief has differed with Allvin on the future of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate Republican: ‘We've gotten lucky' with Mamdani
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said Monday his party has 'gotten lucky' with the Democrats' nominee for New York City mayor as Zohran Mamdani makes his case ahead of the November election. 'We've gotten lucky — bad for America, good for Republicans — with Mr. Mamdani in New York,' Kennedy told NewsNation's Leland Vittert. 'If I didn't know better, I would think he was a Republican plant. If I didn't know better, I'd think that Republicans had created Mr. Mamdani in a petri dish in a genomics lab.' 'He's clearly from what I call the Gary Busey wing — the cray cray wing — of the Democratic Party. That's bad for New York, but it's certainly good for Republicans,' the Pelican State Republican added, mentioning the actor turned reality star. Mamdani, a democratic socialist, recently shocked political observers with his win over political heavyweight and former Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the Big Apple's primary. Cuomo is now running as an independent against Mamdani. While Mamdani has faced criticism from within the party, some Democrats have defended his rise. In a Sunday interview, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) pushed back against Democratic criticism of the mayoral candidate. 'I don't know why they're attacking him. I think it's stupid when maybe we're not in 100 percent agreement, right? But he has some ideas that are clearly, you know, attracting people. It's OK to say, 'I disagree with this, this and this, but I agree with that,'' Gallego said. 'But the idea that we're again, we're just going to throw out people that are really bringing in new ideas to the fold, exciting people just because they're slightly to the right or to the left of us, I think, is dumb,' he added. The Hill has reached out to Mamdani's campaign for comment.
