If "everyone is engaged in the protection of life and property, their own", then that satisfies the NEED clause.
How realistic is it to only allow people with hard evidence of threats to carry, while others may only get a verbal "better watch your back" comment or similar? No way to prove you're in danger unless the threat is considerate enough to implicate himself.
Dude! This is Hawaii, "realistic" doesn't enter into any political consideration, nor much else really. I doubt they even know what that is. The two anecdotes I've heard here are, one, to a small general store that wanted a couple of employees to be granted licenses for protection when they took the deposit to the night deposit box at the bank after 2 AM when the store closed and were told "Hire armored car service", and two, woman who reported a stalker making verbal threats: "Move". That's what the cops here consider "realistic".
These politicians don't have the slightest thread of integrity. They just lie right to everyone's face, including the courts. I really hope Suzuki gets a chance to lie to SCOTUS (of course he would just hire people at taxpayer expense to do the job he's too incompetent to do), especially if Ginsburg and/or Breyer have been replaced by Trump nominees. Suzuki, and all his predecessors along with the police chiefs, mayors and county attorneys, should be imprisoned for violating our constitutional rights.
As I've pointed out before, there is approximately the same danger of being in a car accident as being the victim of a crime of personal confrontation (rape, assault, robbery, etc.... where a firearm for self defense might prove capable of preventing victimization), and in the first case the state mandates under penalty of law that one have car insurance, while in the second it mandates, under penalty of law, that one NOT have insurance (in the form a the most effective self-defense tools). Equal risk of injury, completely opposite treatment by the law re protecting yourself from those equally potential injuries. They don't care about "public safety". They don't care about "personal safety". They care about something else.