In the proposed amendment to Chapter 15 of the Rules of the Chief of Police there is a requirement for the applicant and the approved licensee to utilize a Type 2 holster.  I assume the Type 2 holster is synonymous to a Level 2 holster as it describes a holster with active retention (thumb break strap or locking device) as compared to a Type 1 (Level 1) holster which uses friction to hold the firearm in place.

“Usually, the term “Level 1” retention refers to what many of us call “passive retention.” In other words, the friction and tightness of the holster itself retains the firearm. While that may not sound like much, it’s often perfect for many applications.
Usually, a Level 2 holster is any holster that incorporates some kind of active retention. Some holsters, like Safariland, use a device that locks around your pistol’s trigger guard. Then, you press a button to release it. Some Level 2 holsters utilize a thumb break instead of a trigger guard lock.”

There are not very many inside the waistband (IWB or AIWB) holsters that use a Type 2/Level 2 retention system.  This type of active retention holster is much more common with an outside the waistband (OWB) type holster that is threaded through the belt loops or used with a paddle attachment.

In the proposed Chief’s rules, the failure to use a Type 2 holster would prevent an applicant from obtaining a License to Carry (L2C) Permit §15-21(eight)(H) and the failure to use a Type 2 holster is grounds for the revocation of the L2C Permit in §15-27(1)(C).

HPD does not require its officers to use a Type 2/Level 2 or higher retention holster for its plainclothes on-duty officers or for off-duty carry of their service pistol or other approved supplementary firearms.

Why then are they making it a requirement for a law abiding citizen?  There a few options for Type 2/Level 2 concealed carry holsters.  This severely limits the manner in which a lawful citizen can carry their firearm.  Drawing and hitting the target from concealment in the proposed time allotted will also be very difficult using a Type 2/Level 2 holster.

These proposed Chief’s rules should mirror HPD’s Uniforms, Equipment, and Firearms Policy (2.38) in that it doesn’t state that a Type 2/Level 2 holster is required for plainclothes or off-duty use.  The rules (holster and firearm qualification standards) shouldn’t be more restrictive than the same officers Chief Logan oversees.

I am urging everyone to submit their comments regarding the proposed Chief’s rules before the deadline and if possible show up in person on October 4th at 10:00AM.  If you don’t want take a moment to help make these policies fair for everyone then don’t whine about it when it becomes the standard.

It's gotta be a mistake, think they meant type 2 if open carrying which makes sense.

Well, seeing that they have been dilly-dallying all this time they would have seen this mistake and made the proper corrections.

But they haven't.

Either they are extremely stupid, don't give a sh*t, or are deliberately stalling, it's hard for me to believe that they, as the experts in these matters, would miss this.

I certainly hope that the verbiage for a Type 2/Level2 holster for concealed carry in the proposed Chief’s rules are a mistake, but how do we know for sure?  The proposed rules are difficult to read as the section topics do not seem to be logically organized.  If indeed the requirement for an active retention holster for concealed carry was intended by HPD and no one asks for clarification or opposes the holster requirement, it could indeed become mandatory.

Another question: Does each county get to make up its own rules for L2C application, training, qualification, equipment, etc.?

"Look at that yoyo"



Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

...
I am urging everyone to submit their comments regarding the proposed Chief’s rules before the deadline and if possible show up in person on October 4th at 10:00AM.  If you don’t want take a moment to help make these policies fair for everyone then don’t whine about it when it becomes the standard.

The implication in your last sentence is that somehow some number of people showing up and making certain comments will derail the proposed "policies". Surely you jest! No matter how many people show up, and no matter what they say in their two minutes, no one (with the possible exception of a few cops and military) is getting a carry license in the foreseeable future.

In a way it's MORE discouraging to see large numbers show up and then get shut down. A few years ago there was a bill before a committee and the written testimony was something like 1835 AGAINST, 42 FOR... and it passed the committee, perhaps unanimously. Does that kind of common historical result inspire one to dedicate one's time to the testimony efforts?

Any changes the authorities make will likely be minor, if any. Nothing that would dramatically increase the number of people qualifying for and being issued licenses. But I admit I could be completely wrong and history will not repeat itself.

I will submit written testimony, asserting that the entire Hawaii firearms legal scheme, including registration, etc. is unconstitutional. I'm sure they'll adopt that perspective!

In a way it's MORE discouraging to see large numbers show up and then get shut down. A few years ago there was a bill before a committee and the written testimony was something like 1835 AGAINST, 42 FOR... and it passed the committee, perhaps unanimously. Does that kind of common historical result inspire one to dedicate one's time to the testimony efforts?

Thank you for taking the time to submit your written testimony.  I certainly understand your frustration and given the history of politics in this state, I tend to agree with you.  However, if we just roll over in futility then everything is certain to continue the way is always has been.  If no one took up the NYSRPA vs. Bruen case or Young vs. Hawaii case and gave up fighting for it when it was first denied at the state level instead of taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court, then we surely wouldn’t be having this conversation.  No one thought that it was going to be a certain victory for 2A at any step of the proceedings.  Sometimes what is right does indeed prevail.  We cannot be absolutely sure of the outcome, so why not give it our collective best try?

I intend to provide written testimony.  I will try to present my testimony through the eyes of the senior and retired community.

Senior couples that are empty nesters (kids flew the coop) and alone in the house.

Seniors that would love to go hiking, walking, and enjoy the beach.

Seniors that have lost their spouse and live alone.

Seniors, like me, who would give their life to protect their spouse.  Although, truth be told, I would rather the asshat give up their life instead of me, should he try to attack us with malice.

But to do that, I'm gonna need tools.  And right now it looks like HPD and the other LE counties are making it almost impossible for me to do it legally.  (see what I did there?)

Thank you for taking the time to submit your written testimony.  I certainly understand your frustration and given the history of politics in this state, I tend to agree with you.  However, if we just roll over in futility then everything is certain to continue the way is always has been.  If no one took up the NYSRPA vs. Bruen case or Young vs. Hawaii case and gave up fighting for it when it was first denied at the state level instead of taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court, then we surely wouldn’t be having this conversation.  No one thought that it was going to be a certain victory for 2A at any step of the proceedings.  Sometimes what is right does indeed prevail.  We cannot be absolutely sure of the outcome, so why not give it our collective best try?

First, most regulars here do submit testimony.

Second, submitting testimony has been demonstrated to give zero weight to the decision.  The lawmakers do whatever they want as long as it's politically in-line with the Democrat Party agenda.

Third, there's a major difference between taking a government law to court versus testifying before lawmakers.  Lawmakers are not there to find the truth.  They are there to push an agenda.

We've seen too many times where "Democracy" is only a "thing" when Democrats have the majority.  Otherwise, they do whatever it takes to side-step or ignore the will of the people.

Thanks Flapp.  Great points. 

Times are changing. Things are falling apart and regardless of how you feel about that it does provide opportunities to influence policies that were not available before.

They wouldn’t need propaganda if they weren’t afraid of losing control

In the end, it comes down to "no vote, no grumble" saying. If you don't submit testimony or show up, no complain later.

I know there's now way a GOP governor will win against Green. But I vote so I can grumble all I want later on.

Thank you for taking the time to submit your written testimony.  I certainly understand your frustration and given the history of politics in this state, I tend to agree with you.  However, if we just roll over in futility then everything is certain to continue the way is always has been.  If no one took up the NYSRPA vs. Bruen case or Young vs. Hawaii case and gave up fighting for it when it was first denied at the state level instead of taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court, then we surely wouldn’t be having this conversation.  No one thought that it was going to be a certain victory for 2A at any step of the proceedings.  Sometimes what is right does indeed prevail.  We cannot be absolutely sure of the outcome, so why not give it our collective best try?

Your original post that I commented on suggested that testimony at this public hearing might be influential in changing the procedures. You made no mention of lawsuits, which are clearly the only method by which any Second Amendment infringements in this state will be overridden (and even that has slim chance of success (see: Bruen, Young, etc.)).  People can sometimes support such lawsuits via financial donations. But testimony before a Marxist authoritarian tribunal...utterly meaningless. I only do it on the one in a trillion chance miracle that something might occur in which these people would some day be held accountable, and want there to be record that they were clearly informed of their illegal acts.

So... what Flapp said.

In the end, it comes down to "no vote, no grumble" saying. If you don't submit testimony or show up, no complain later.

I know there's now way a GOP governor will win against Green. But I vote so I can grumble all I want later on.

What if your "grumble" is that voting and testimony are clearly useless? 

What if your "grumble" is that voting and testimony are clearly useless? 

Then u vote so u can grumble about the grumble.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

didn't see that requirement in the HRS...

Well, seeing that they have been dilly-dallying all this time they would have seen this mistake and made the proper corrections.

But they haven't.

Either they are extremely stupid, don't give a sh*t, or are deliberately stalling, it's hard for me to believe that they, as the experts in these matters, would miss this.

They are stalling, this is exactly the game plan.  They don't intend to issue any CCW until the next legislative session where the great minds of our legislature can pass nonsensical sensitive places requirements, ridiculously burdensome and impossible training and insurance requirements, and whatever other unconstitutional bullshit they can muster.  Then we get to fight it out in court for another few decades to a then flipped SCOTUS who will shit on the 2nd Amendment. 

didn't see that requirement in the HRS...

The chief making up his own rules as allowed by Chapter 15 for the Rules of the Police Chief. Of which we have never seen before. We need to do a FOIA request for the entire rule book

The chief making up his own rules as allowed by Chapter 15 for the Rules of the Police Chief. Of which we have never seen before. We need to do a FOIA request for the entire rule book

Perhaps before filing an official UIPA request, you can just ask them for a digital to be emailed to you.

I just did. Maybe if we all did... LOL!

Nah! File the UIPA request.

(I'll let you know when/if I hear back.)