HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit) (Read 14240 times)

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #120 on: September 09, 2024, 11:17:48 AM »
Infuriating.  Is there any recourse or is that the end of the road?

And I wonder what their definition of "beach" is.  Is a rocky coastline considered a beach?

This ruling was with regard to the injunction issued by the Hawaii Judge.  It isn't a ruling for the lawsuit itself.

nalo_b

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #121 on: September 09, 2024, 11:53:26 AM »
So for now back to sidewalk carry?

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #122 on: September 09, 2024, 11:57:27 AM »
So for now back to sidewalk carry?

Yup.

zippz

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #123 on: September 09, 2024, 12:07:31 PM »
So for now back to sidewalk carry?

Pretty much.

Although you could carry in banks with consent, realistically no banks will give that consent.

You could walk around in circles of parking lots shared with government offices.
Join the Hawaii Firearms Coalition at www.hifico.org.  Hawaii's  gun rights organization focused on legal action, legislation, and grassroots activism.

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #124 on: September 09, 2024, 04:18:11 PM »
Pretty much.

Although you could carry in banks with consent, realistically no banks will give that consent.

You could walk around in circles of parking lots shared with government offices.

I thought the default ban in banks was stopped with the injuction. So banks would need a no guns approved sign.

Heavies

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #125 on: September 09, 2024, 04:42:25 PM »
What every gun owner in the USA needs to do is get Trump back in office.  The Kamala administration will certainly continue to stack courts against not only the 2A, but the constitution in general. 

This time I hope Trump will surround himself with better advisors.  I firmly believe bad advice from the NRA was the probable cause for the bump stock fiasco, which we see now spiraling out of control. 

Thankfully the judges that HE appointed is keeping the anti gun bureaucracy under control, for now.

We sure cannot take another 4 to 8 years of left control.  Kiss your rights bye bye.

zippz

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #126 on: September 09, 2024, 04:56:40 PM »
I thought the default ban in banks was stopped with the injuction. So banks would need a no guns approved sign.

The absolute ban, even with a guns allowed sign, was stopped in court.  Now they are like any other private property open to the public, like a 7-11 or Macy's, that requires a guns allowed sign or other consent.
Join the Hawaii Firearms Coalition at www.hifico.org.  Hawaii's  gun rights organization focused on legal action, legislation, and grassroots activism.

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #127 on: September 09, 2024, 05:26:16 PM »
The absolute ban, even with a guns allowed sign, was stopped in court.  Now they are like any other private property open to the public, like a 7-11 or Macy's, that requires a guns allowed sign or other consent.

The injunction stated no "vampire rule" for private property open to the public. So if banks are like any other private property open to the public, then it's an automatic approval to CCW in there. But they can ban them with said sign.

The 9th upheld that banks cannot be sensitive places. So no automatic ban.

Unless I'm wrong.

zippz

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #128 on: September 09, 2024, 06:51:32 PM »
The injunction stated no "vampire rule" for private property open to the public. So if banks are like any other private property open to the public, then it's an automatic approval to CCW in there. But they can ban them with said sign.

The 9th upheld that banks cannot be sensitive places. So no automatic ban.

Unless I'm wrong.

Consent on private property open to the public is not needed in California.  Consent is still required in Hawaii
Join the Hawaii Firearms Coalition at www.hifico.org.  Hawaii's  gun rights organization focused on legal action, legislation, and grassroots activism.

kopjecat

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #129 on: September 14, 2024, 03:10:01 PM »
I see that the C&C www.oneoahu.org/sensitive-places page hasn't been updated to reflect the recent circuit court decision.  The HPD page links to it, and when I applied for CCW they verbally told me to watch that page for any changes in the law.  I guess it doesn't mean anything, but you'd think they would make an effort to keep the page updated.

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #130 on: September 18, 2024, 08:36:16 AM »
Appeal to En Banc filed yesterday (full 9th circuit panel) since the 3 judge basically removed almost all the injunction.

If you can donate or again because this is costing more money.

https://www.givesendgo.com/GAXTH?utm_source=sharelink&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_campaign=GAXTH&fbclid=IwY2xjawFX_NhleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHQcANWmbQGIQqPMqs3vwr4EucKPCfAeRK0tU2WPSlnSeeYmw1_rpkRJSFg_aem_K1qYhg97CJZxcqZFUvMWGg

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #131 on: October 10, 2024, 11:35:49 AM »
The state is being asked by the 9th for their reply to our challenge to the ruling. WHich means the 9th will probably take it en bac (full judges panel). I'm still not holding my breath as the 9th has more anti 2a judges than judges who abide by the constitution.  But this is 1 step closer for SCOTUS to take a look.

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #132 on: October 29, 2024, 12:13:07 PM »
Hawaii responded to the petition.

To sum it up, until a decision to be heard en banc (full 9th judge panel), the current 9th (3 judge panel) ruling isn't in effect yet.

Which means the automatic ban on private property open to the public is still not enforceable by the law. So u can carry without having to ask permission.  The 9th's 3 judge panel ruled that you cannot, but haven't signed the order yet due to the above.

Some people already knew this, but the AG"s office refused to confirm it. Had the 9th's ruling been in effect, I'm sure the AG's office would have stated so, but instead stated something like "we cannot confirm anything".

To sum it up again, it's a procedural matter right now why you can still carry on private property open to the public without needing permission.