2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: wolfwood on March 20, 2014, 08:30:44 AM
-
Since the decision a lot of people have been asking what is going on. Well, let’s try and break this down a little bit:
1.) Our decision basically rides on the Peruta v. San Diego case. That case was argued earlier in the morning than Baker was argued. Therefore, the decision in that case was released prior. Instead of writing a new decision, the (3) judge panel basically said, “Hey, look at this case – it says why Baker should win.” Our case then had its preliminary injunction vacated and remanded to the district court to be heard in light of Peruta. Remember, a preliminary injunction was us basically saying, “This is so jacked up that you should give me a carry license while we wait to figure out the merits of the case.” We still have to handle the merits. The preliminary injunction was just our first bite at the apple; sadly, it was a bite that took about 3 years to chew (It’s a really long dinner…).
2.) The Peruta case has some stuff going on with it. Basically, after San Diego lost they decided that they were no longer going to defend the matter in court. Their white flag went up and they are surrendering. The State of California Attorney General’s Office, saw this white flag, and were like, “Oh shit. An unconstitutional law needs saving!” So off they ran to the courts to ask if they can pinch hit for the San Diego Sheriff.
This had some problems, because everyone thought the game was over. So they did some voodoo magic and filed some documents asking the 9th circuit court if they can play ball. This matter is currently pending before the court and has not been ruled on.
Why do we care if the Attorney general gets a chance to swing? Well. Good question! After a 3 judge panel makes a ruling, the parties involved have an option to ask the entire court or generally a significantly larger panel, which in the 9th circuit would be 11 justices instead of 3, to rehear the case in question. This process is called en banc.
So, if that wasn’t a pain in the ass enough – if the parties involved don’t want to do this, the judges that were on the panel can do it themselves! To make it even better, judges who were not on the panel can also call for a vote. Once a vote is held or not held, then we kind of know how this will proceed.
Lastly, there are some timelines to this stuff, and a few of them are passing as we speak. The problem is that because this is such a huge cluster of crap, we don’t even think that the courts or anyone involved are 100% sure of what deadlines have passed and what is to be heard next.
3.) Just the other day in our case, Judge Alan Kay (our judge) got notice of all this stuff. He complied with the 9th Circuit and dismissed a section of the case as directed. Then, he put the State of Hawaii and the Attorney General back on legal notice that a law on the books has been implicated. This was kind of necessary, because the State and the AG previously ducked out of the suit saying they didn’t want anything to do with it. Well, now they are going to have to come back and play some ball.
4.) The future: We wait. I know. I know. And, I really hate it too! There isn’t too much to do right now. We have to see how Peruta is ultimately disposed of. If it stand, carry is a win hands down. If they start playing legal games with Peruta, we could be stayed or put on hold for a very long time. Best case scenario is we could be exercising our rights by summer time. Worst case scenario means we could be waiting a few more years for things to play out in the 9th circuit on a single case.
Lastly, I want people to know that we can still use donations. If you like the work we are doing, please help us out. Send a few bucks our way. We had to bear all the costs of that appeal, which was probably in the realm of 12k dollars. If you want to help us out, you can do so online at www.thehdf.org/donate/ (http://www.thehdf.org/donate/) or by mail at 99-040 Kauhale St. #1798, Aiea, HI 96701. If you have any questions, I’m available through e-mail at Chris@thehdf.org. If you really need me, we can talk (just shoot me an e-mail first) and I will be happy to speak with you on the phone.
Blessings to everyone! We are still fighting – 3 years strong!
Christopher Baker
--- Updated thread with information.
Enjoy your constitutional rights. We just won on the handgun carry law. The rest of the HRS is being taken care of in George Young's appeal.
Courtesy of Chris Baker and his two unpaid attorneys Alan Beck (me) and Richard Loren Holcomb (lead counsel).
Baker v. Kealoha Decesion (http://www.scribd.com/doc/213562890/Baker-v-Kealoha-Decesion#)
-
.
-
Wow. Congrats all. Where do I sign up for CC classes?
-
AWESOME news for some folks :thumbsup: :shaka: :worship:
-
First off thanks the the two unpaid attorney's im positive you'll be rewarded by much bussiness from the firearms community.
Now any advisement on when to apply for it. Thanks again :shaka:
-
Hooray!
-
WOW!
-
I'm somewhat busy fighting the ATF and National City for Ares right now so I hope this luck keeps going
-
Good News.
-
I'm somewhat busy fighting the ATF and National City for Ares right now so I hope this luck keeps going
good luck buddy on the streak thats another big one :thumbsup:
-
Good luck wolfwood! And thank you!
-
:thumbsup:
-
Enjoy your constitutional rights. We just won on the handgun carry law. The rest of the HRS is being taken care of in George Young's appeal.
Courtesy of Chris Baker and his two unpaid attorneys Alan Beck (me) and Richard Loren Holcomb (lead counsel).
Baker v. Kealoha Decesion (http://www.scribd.com/doc/213562890/Baker-v-Kealoha-Decesion#)
Thanks so much for everything you have done. Can you give us an idea of what happens now? When we should apply for CCW permits? Does this have to go back to the district court where they would order C&C to issue the permit?
-
SWWWWEEEEET!!!
-
Thanks so much for everything you have done. Can you give us an idea of what happens now? When we should apply for CCW permits? Does this have to go back to the district court where they would order C&C to issue the permit?
here's the thing i was thinking about a second ago
since the city was "may issue", are there any class requirements for carry?
because if there aren't, it would seem to me that for them to add requirements now that we could soon be "shall issue" is an undue burden
what say you all?
-
Whoa!! Thank you Mr. Beck, Mr. Holcomb and Chris for your hard work and diligence. Good luck on the Ares Armor situation with the ATF and national city.
-
This is awesome :thumbsup:
-
Great to hear!
-
When I first read about this lawsuit a few years ago, I never dreamt this day would come so soon. I can't thank you guys enough.
-
Great work! :thumbsup:
-
The court is still divided 2-1 and as Baker comes in a different "position" & "posture" compared to Peruta, a SCOTUS appeal may be forthcoming.
However the FIRST ROUND OF DRINKS IS ON ME! :thumbsup:
-
Hats off to you thanks gentleman :shaka:
-
The court is still divided 2-1 and as Baker comes in a different "position" compared to Peruta, a SCOTUS appeal may be forthcoming.
However the FIRST ROUND OF DRINKS IS ON ME! :thumbsup:
We are a ways off from that if ever; it's unlikely the City would appeal it that far. I don't think they would appeal anything as it is, but we will see.
-
:thumbsup:
Congratulations to all involved in the lawsuit. Mr. Baker, Mr. Beck and Mr. Holcomb, and their assisting associates have my respect for filing the suit and spending what are no doubt countless hours researching, refining their arguments, and filing endless reams of paperwork. :worship:
I admire your persistence in standing up to a (in my opinion) fascist government of legislators and law enforcement and judges who have no problem with enacting and enforcing and upholding unconstitutional laws. The odds were against this case, at least until possibly being accepted by SCOTUS, and the luck of the draw in the Ninth Circuit resulted in two judges who are willing to uphold what the Constitution actually says. I knew that a rational assessment of the case would yield this result, but wasn't expecting the Ninth Circuit to be rational about a Second Amendment issue. Wow! :thumbsup:
Let's hope that the Hawaii Attorney General and Governor acknowledge this and make the whole state consistent with the Constitutionally-guaranteed right to bear arms. I'm not holding my breath, but hopeful that I might still be alive when it happens. :shaka:
-
Holy crap this is great news! :shaka:
-
Congrats to the baker team. So whats the next step in the fight?
-
A big thanks and congrats to Chris and the team. The hard work, time and effort paid off. We're all grateful :shaka:
-
:worship: :worship: :worship:
Awesome news!!!
-
as others have noted, a big congratulations and thanks on behalf of everyone who stands for freedom in this state.
furthermore, I do not really know what the linked document really said in laymans terms. When will we have a document we can print out to take to HPD and demand our permits?
-
Congrats to the baker team. So whats the next step in the fight?
george young's appeal is the next step. The government conceded on all issues other than carry so HRS 134 is going to be revised very soon.
A lot of credit goes to both Chris and George for stepping up and pushing for Second Amendment rights in Hawaii
-
is the line at HPD is gonna get crazy again?
-
wow. thank you so much!
-
george young's appeal is the next step. The government conceded on all issues other than carry so HRS 134 is going to be revised very soon.
A lot of credit goes to both Chris and George for stepping up and pushing for Second Amendment rights in Hawaii
With regard to the Young case, I didn't see any courtroom oral argument on Michella website, just a lot of filings. Is there to be no courtroom argument or was there one not posted or listed?
-
george young's appeal is the next step. The government conceded on all issues other than carry so HRS 134 is going to be revised very soon.
Thank you for all your work on this and other Second Amendment cases. I'm wondering you'd be willing to narrow down "very soon"? Six months? Two years? Five more years? :shaka:
A lot of credit goes to both Chris and George for stepping up and pushing for Second Amendment rights in Hawaii
:thumbsup: :worship:
-
With regard to the Young case, I didn't see any courtroom oral argument on Michella website, just a lot of filings. Is there to be no courtroom argument or was there one not posted or listed?
Arguments have no been scheduled yet. Since the appeal was unopposed other than on 134-9 the Court might not even have arguments. I hope that is the case since it costs a lot of money to pay for going up to San Fran for this stuff
-
Thank you all who were involved :worship:! :thumbsup: :shaka: I will now save for a firearm to carry.That XDs 4inch is looking mighty appealing now :thumbsup:
-
That's for all the hard work guys :shaka:
-
Thank you for what you've done. I hope to see CCW as shall issue someday soon.
-
We are a ways off from that if ever; it's unlikely the City would appeal it that far. I don't think they would appeal anything as it is, but we will see.
Chris, is this the time to apply for CCW or should we wait until the lower court grants your injunction?
-
Thank you Chris and to your team.
We are all grateful for your hard work and determination in helping all legal gun owners and enthusiasts.
Mahalo
-
Chris, is this the time to apply for CCW or should we wait until the lower court grants your injunction?
We need to wait to see how Peruta is finally disposed off. We should know more mid April. That is my best guess at this point.
-
Chris - Congratulations!!
Mr. Holcomb and Mr. Beck - Thanks for your expertise and persistence.
-
Congrats everyone and thank you for your hard work.
-
Somone has finally reported on this case. The always fascinating Eugene Volokh:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/20/hawaii-restrictions-on-gun-carrying-essentially-held-unconstitutional-for-now/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/20/hawaii-restrictions-on-gun-carrying-essentially-held-unconstitutional-for-now/)
-
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25033588/hawaii-man-to-get-2nd-shot-at-gun-license-request (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25033588/hawaii-man-to-get-2nd-shot-at-gun-license-request)
-
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25033588/hawaii-man-to-get-2nd-shot-at-gun-license-request (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25033588/hawaii-man-to-get-2nd-shot-at-gun-license-request)
Scrolled through the comments on the facebook page a bit. Stopped in case I were to see some anti-self defense/ gun comments.
-
Scrolled through the comments on the facebook page a bit. Stopped in case I were to see some anti-self defense/ gun comments.
and let the anti-gun butt-hurt begin.... :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:
-
We need to wait to see how Peruta is finally disposed off. We should know more mid April. That is my best guess at this point.
Chris,
If you win and Honolulu issues, will you apply to the other 3 counties? If not, will you ask the court to make the license statewide under the "undue burden" concept?
-
Chris,
If you win and Honolulu issues, will you apply to the other 3 counties? If not, will you ask the court to make the license statewide under the "undue burden" concept?
this will bind everyone in Hawaii. If another county fails to comply, we will deal with them accordingly. #childrenscollegefunds
-
I posted the actual BAKER v. KEALOHA courtroom oral argument on my YouTube page so anyone can easily listen to it.
At 35:40 the Gun Control lawyer claims that if victims of crime are allowed to carry a gun then the Criminals will always come with a gun since the know the victims are armed.
The judge jumps on her. "But criminals aren't being issued permits. At least I don't believe they are!"
Peruta, Richards, and now Baker. This calls for a drink! I am going with one shot of Glenlivet. Cheers!
Perhaps someone should start a favorite CCW weapon thread in anticipation of the final ending of the State of Hawaii's past deprivation of the people's 2nd amendment rights, and the affirmation of the people's freedom as enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
Hawaii 2nd Amendment Victory: Baker (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4RVIMAUzLc#ws)
-
Good luck wolfwood! And thank you!
:shaka:
-
It is pretty ridiculous to read some of the comments posted below those news story links... These anti gun people are living in a fantasy. "hawaii has less crime because there is no carry" really? ::)
-
Enjoy your constitutional rights. We just won on the handgun carry law. The rest of the HRS is being taken care of in George Young's appeal.
Courtesy of Chris Baker and his two unpaid attorneys Alan Beck (me) and Richard Loren Holcomb (lead counsel).
Baker v. Kealoha Decesion (http://www.scribd.com/doc/213562890/Baker-v-Kealoha-Decesion#)
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for everyone's hard work and dedication!!!
-
This is fantastic news! Thanks to everyone involved in helping us secure our god-given right in this state. So when can we expect to be able to excercise our right to defend ourselves when outside of our homes?
-
... So when can we expect to be able to excercise our right to defend ourselves when outside of our homes?
I heard that in Orange County, California, where the sheriff decided to conform to the Peruta decision even before it has been finalized, that someone called in and got the appointment for the interview required for the CCW permit and was given a date in 2016 (yes, sixteen). Since things are only at stage one here, it might be a while. In all fairness to Orange County, the Board of Supervisors did allocate $1.5 MILLION to hire 15 retired deputies to handle the applications, so hopefully those appointment dates will be much closer to the present once those people are hired and up to speed. I have a suspicion that Hawaii will stonewall and fight tooth and nail to avoid allowing us to exercise our natural, civil, fundamental, individual right to bear arms as protected by the Constitution. :shaka:
-
That's amazing guys! Great work!
-
Lots of tap dancing by the state attorney. I would hate to be representing the state.
I posted the actual BAKER v. KEALOHA courtroom oral argument on my YouTube page so anyone can easily listen to it.
At 35:40 the Gun Control lawyer claims that if victims of crime are allowed to carry a gun then the Criminals will always come with a gun since the know the victims are armed.
The judge jumps on her. "But criminals aren't being issued permits. At least I don't believe they are!"
Peruta, Richards, and now Baker. This calls for a drink! I am going with one shot of Glenlivet. Cheers!
Perhaps someone should start a favorite CCW weapon thread in anticipation of the final ending of the State of Hawaii's past deprivation of the people's 2nd amendment rights, and the affirmation of the people's freedom as enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
Hawaii 2nd Amendment Victory: Baker (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4RVIMAUzLc#ws)
-
WOWOWOWOWOWOW!!!!!!!
-
Gentlemen of the Baker team, thank you! Whenever you're in town the beers are on me! Shots too!
You guys rock. :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
-
Many thanks to all involved, the attorneys Mr. Holcomb, Mr. Beck, their team and to Chris! Chris thanks for taking on the system for the good of all, thanks for this site and for the HDF.
-
I'm a bit confused, todays win for Chris means that we can apply and possibly be able to get a ccw here in Hawaii? that Hawaii will be a shall issue state? would the win help for ccw or or open carry or both? What exactly does the win mean for the rest of us right now? I know Chris said April for the other case to finally come to a decision but does anyone know when change may happen in Hawaii (did anything really change yet and/or when might we actually see a change if ever?)?
-
Job well done. Many thanks to all, fighting the good fight. :thumbsup:
-
I'm a bit confused, todays win for Chris means that we can apply and possibly be able to get a ccw here in Hawaii? that Hawaii will be a shall issue state? would the win help for ccw or or open carry or both? What exactly does the win mean for the rest of us right now? I know Chris said April for the other case to finally come to a decision but does anyone know when change may happen in Hawaii (did anything really change yet and/or when might we actually see a change if ever?)?
My rough (and probably somewhat wrong) understanding of this is that when Chris went to court initially, he filed a request for an injunction preventing HPD from enforcing the arbitrary "May Issue" rules and issue him a concealed carry permit. His injunction was denied. He appealed to the 9th circuit. A three judge panel heard the case and, today, and decided to vacate he lower court's ruling on 2nd Amendment grounds. A couple of weeks ago, they decided the Peruta case which said basically that a state has to offer either open carry or concealed carry. Chris's decision built on Peruta. But California is trying to appeal Peruta to the entire 9th circuit.
Chris's comment is that whichever way Peruta goes, so goes his case. If the 9th circuit does not hear Peruta "en banc", which could be for any number of reasons, I assume the judge hearing Chris's case will issue an injunction. That's the moment to apply for a CCW. And/Or the Supreme Court takes Peruta or another case and finally decides the issue of "bearing arms".
So, in short if Peruta and Chris's case stand, Hawaii will have to decide if it wants concealed carry or open carry and pretty much become a shall issue for whichever one (or both) that they choose.
Hope this helps. Disclaimer: this is my understanding which is almost certainly not 100% correct.
-
.
-
There's a video on HNN if you wanna check it out
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25033588/hawaii-man-to-get-2nd-shot-at-gun-license-request (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25033588/hawaii-man-to-get-2nd-shot-at-gun-license-request)
-
My rough (and probably somewhat wrong) understanding of this is that when Chris went to court initially, he filed a request for an injunction preventing HPD from enforcing the arbitrary "May Issue" rules and issue him a concealed carry permit. His injunction was denied. He appealed to the 9th circuit. A three judge panel heard the case and, today, and decided to vacate he lower court's ruling on 2nd Amendment grounds. A couple of weeks ago, they decided the Peruta case which said basically that a state has to offer either open carry or concealed carry. Chris's decision built on Peruta. But California is trying to appeal Peruta to the entire 9th circuit.
Chris's comment is that whichever way Peruta goes, so goes his case. If the 9th circuit does not hear Peruta "en banc", which could be for any number of reasons, I assume the judge hearing Chris's case will issue an injunction. That's the moment to apply for a CCW. And/Or the Supreme Court takes Peruta or another case and finally decides the issue of "bearing arms".
So, in short if Peruta and Chris's case stand, Hawaii will have to decide if it wants concealed carry or open carry and pretty much become a shall issue for whichever one (or both) that they choose.
Hope this helps. Disclaimer: this is my understanding which is almost certainly not 100% correct.
ok, that makes sense to me. thanks for the info
-
I'm a bit confused, todays win for Chris means that we can apply and possibly be able to get a ccw here in Hawaii? that Hawaii will be a shall issue state? would the win help for ccw or or open carry or both? What exactly does the win mean for the rest of us right now? I know Chris said April for the other case to finally come to a decision but does anyone know when change may happen in Hawaii (did anything really change yet and/or when might we actually see a change if ever?)?
It could take a few months, it could take a few years depending which way the appeals go.
-
Great news! Thank you Chris Baker and your team. Finally a step forward for this state.
-
Thank you Chris and your great team for tirelessly fighting for our fundamental rights.Step closer to our goals.Long live 2A .
-
A BIG mahalo to Alan, Richard and Chris for all their efforts in this long drawn out battle....
-
Many thanks to all involved, the attorneys Mr. Holcomb, Mr. Beck, their team and to Chris! Chris thanks for taking on the system for the good of all, thanks for this site and for the HDF.
Gentlemen of the Baker team, thank you! Whenever you're in town the beers are on me! Shots too!
You guys rock. :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
+2
:shaka:
-
aieahound I think you typed your message inside my quote so it looks like I am double quoted or someone else's quote got miss associated to me.
-
:worship:
also good luck with ares armor
-
An interesting article from guns.com on this case. Quotes Max Cooper of HRA who says its time for more people to apply for CCW permits...
http://www.guns.com/2014/03/21/aloha-federal-court-strikes-hawaiis-may-issue-practice-unconstitutional/ (http://www.guns.com/2014/03/21/aloha-federal-court-strikes-hawaiis-may-issue-practice-unconstitutional/)
-
Assuming that the legal hurdles are all resolved (however quickly that happens), the state will then get to legislate procedures for this new philosophy. Which probably means waiting a year after the courts finally say "Yep, we're done."
-
Assuming that the legal hurdles are all resolved (however quickly that happens), the state will then get to legislate procedures for this new philosophy. Which probably means waiting a year after the courts finally say "Yep, we're done."
perhaps. But in Illinois, the courts gave a (relatively short) time limit and the legislature had to scramble to enact the CCW law.
-
Assuming that the legal hurdles are all resolved (however quickly that happens), the state will then get to legislate procedures for this new philosophy. Which probably means waiting a year after the courts finally say "Yep, we're done."
Considering that SB2938, the bill to allow the first step of a handgun application for a "permit to acquire" to be done online (which could easily been done via phone right now) was only for a "working group" to study the question, and that it would have been composed of 83% outspoken opponents of such a process, AND that EVEN THAT measly bill to study a process was not even given a hearing in the current committee assignment and has thus died (aka "been deferred"), we can only imagine what hurdles this legislature and law enforcement will create before they will actually respect a court's decision that citizens are allowed to "bear" a functional handgun outside the home for self defense. I'm pretty sure I'm going to be saying lots of bad words in a really loud and nasty tone of voice when I read about various legislators' specific proposed legislation to attempt to continue to subvert the Constitution.
-
Assuming that the legal hurdles are all resolved (however quickly that happens), the state will then get to legislate procedures for this new philosophy. Which probably means waiting a year after the courts finally say "Yep, we're done."
I was thinking the same thing. The current legislative session ends in May, so a realistic time frame for hashing out the new law would be sometime next year. And that's if everything else goes unchallenged.
-
perhaps. But in Illinois, the courts gave a (relatively short) time limit and the legislature had to scramble to enact the CCW law.
My bad... DUH, it was Moore v. Madigan that dealt with Illinois CCW, not McDonald.
Date of McDonald v. Chicago decision: June 28, 2010 Moore v. Madigan decision: December 11, 2012
Date of Illinois issuing first CCW license: March 1, 2014
By my calculations, that's approximately THREE YEARS AND EIGHT MONTHS. Imagine how long it would have taken had they not been "scrambling"! 15 MONTHS... not bad at all, considering how legislatures work. That did include some court ordered "deadlines" and the "deadline extensions".
Peruta litigator Chuck Michel believes that case will be taken en banc, and then take between 6 months and two years to render a decision. IF it's upheld, maybe Hawaii CCW issues by 2020 2016-17.?! I'll be REALLY a bit old[er] by then! :shake: That's assuming that IF it is upheld, that it isn't appealed to SCOTUS and accepted there, and upheld there. Add two years.
Let's hope SCOTUS takes Drake next month and settles this issue favorably in the fall of this year for the whole country, which last I checked includes even Hawaii.
-
Chris - Congratulations!!
Mr. Holcomb and Mr. Beck - Thanks for your expertise and persistence.
+1 :thumbsup:
-
Congratulations, Chris!!
The court is still divided 2-1 and as Baker comes in a different "position" & "posture" compared to Peruta, a SCOTUS appeal may be forthcoming.
I agree with Chris, I don't think the city will bother to appeal in that direction as it would be unnecessary paperwork. SCOTUS would decline to hear their appeal anyway. It makes more sense to me for them to just ask for a stay or something, and wait to see what becomes of Peruta.
I was worried that the various requests to intervene and rehear Peruta en banc would delay the ruling on the Baker case, but I guess not!
The crucial difference between the Baker and Peruta cases, as far as I can tell, was the legal stage of proceedings they were at. Peruta was at summary judgment while Baker was at preliminary injunction (where it is harder to win). I think that's what the dissenting judge was keying in on, but we were fortunate enough to escape from that. Even if things went his way, it would only have been a lot more paperwork, time, and money involved but the end result would be the same for everyone so it's great that everything is being expedited.
-
My line of reasoning and read of the tea leaves as to the motives of the judges of the 9th Federal Appeals court is that they WANT Peruta to go to SCOTUS because they are certain it will be upheld.
Judges like when their rulings are upheld and hate it when they are overturned on appeal.
So which rulings go to SCOTUS from the judges perspective is different from those of us who just want the deprivation of our 2nd Amendment rights to come to a quick end. The judges are thinking they want their ruling upheld and set nationwide precedent.
The more complications in the case, the more chance that the ruling could be picked apart somehow. you know how judges like to "split the baby".
Side note: I observed that even Solomon needed to have a sword and hence the threat of force so he could threaten to split the baby in half in order that he could determine who the real mother was.
-
http://www.youtube.com/embed/F584p5kJL-U?rel=0 (http://www.youtube.com/embed/F584p5kJL-U?rel=0)
-
I have a Glock 30 just'a waiting to be carried just like she was carried in Arizona. Her name is Betsy. 45 acp. I smell victory.Thanks guys.
-
If anyone knowledgeable on the Drake case can give us a review of the SCOTUS appeal and the facts of the case it would be helpful in light of the the Drake appeal citing the Peruta case as a basis to grant appeal to SCOTUS.
http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/drake_supplemental_FILED.pdf (http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/drake_supplemental_FILED.pdf)
-
Let's hope SCOTUS takes Drake next month and settles this issue favorably in the fall of this year for the whole country, which last I checked includes even Hawaii.
idk man, I know a lot of people which still don't think Hawaii is part of the USA. Even some government agencies I have had to fight with don't see Hawaii as part of the USA...
-
idk man, I know a lot of people which still don't think Hawaii is part of the USA. Even some government agencies I have had to fight with don't see Hawaii as part of the USA...
You mean those agencies that took $200 MILLION from the feds for the wonderful Obamacare Hawaii website may have done so under false pretenses? I wonder if Senator Slom will ever get any real answers to his inquiries into that money and where it went to whom for what.
If SCOTUS should happen to take Drake and rule that all states "shall issue" based solely upon the claim of self defense, Hawaii will eventually learn that it is indeed part of the Untied States. I'm certain that most of the Hawaii government authorities (legislative, administrative and judicial) will try to subvert such a decision by delaying implementation and creating new and unconstitutional requirements and/or financially burdensome or extensive time commitment burdens before they will "allow" us to actually exercise our natural, civil, fundamental, individual, unalienable Constitutionally-protected right to bear arms. I'm guessing more litigation... but let's wait for Drake or Peruta to move through the system... I guess we'll see... eventually. Or maybe Hawaii will secede.
-
.
-
Good; I hope Hawaii secedes. That way, we can declare ourselves warlords, and I can begin my childhood dream of conquering the pacific and establishing the oceanic empire. :rofl:
Well if Hawaii seceded and really cut all ties with the United States you'd need to be a warlord because within months of the military and all other federal government funding leaving this place cannibalism would be rife. :shaka:
Sorry. :stopjack:
-
Trust me, you don't want an empire in the Pacific. The maintenance costs are our of this world and there's no way to enforce most of your territory. Better to go with a medium-size piracy outfit and if you can find a state to pick up the tab then even better. Mo money mo problems.
-
How this thread went from the Baker win to seceding from the USA is beyond me.
Try putting down that Hawaii is not part of the USA on your Tax forms and see what the IRS does to you. :stopjack:
With regard to permits CCW post Baker, as I have suggested before, limit the request for a CCW FORM that COMPLIES with Peruta, Richards, & Baker.
IF they refuse the first step of providing a form that complies with the law, then legal action is indicated, possibly filing for a writ of mandamus that they provide the form.
-
I had the same thought about secession myself but I thought it was just a delusion of my crazy mind until I saw other people bring it up first. In other threads here I've seen people mention things such as civil uprisings, too. Although different, both scenarios boil down to vehement disagreements over gun control issues followed by some sort of rebellion.
-
How this thread went from the Baker win to seceding from the USA is beyond me.
Try putting down that Hawaii is not part of the USA on your Tax forms and see what the IRS does to you. :stopjack:
With regard to permits CCW post Baker, as I have suggested before, limit the request for a CCW FORM that COMPLIES with Peruta, Richards, & Baker.
IF they refuse the first step of providing a form that complies with the law, then legal action is indicated, possibly filing for a writ of mandamus that they provide the form.
The specific form they provide really has nothing to do with that, it doesn't look too much different than the permit to acquire paperwork.
-
The specific form they provide really has nothing to do with that, it doesn't look too much different than the permit to acquire paperwork.
Actually it does differ. Asked for what job requires you to carry a firearm, signature of Employer from that company etc.
http://www.konaguns.com/uploads/1/7/5/3/17531595/license_to_carry_application.pdf (http://www.konaguns.com/uploads/1/7/5/3/17531595/license_to_carry_application.pdf)
-
all I got to say is. AWESOME JOB to the whole legal team! Now tell Beretta to hurry up and release the Pico...... :thumbsup:
-
Actually it does differ. Asked for what job requires you to carry a firearm, signature of Employer from that company etc.
http://www.konaguns.com/uploads/1/7/5/3/17531595/license_to_carry_application.pdf (http://www.konaguns.com/uploads/1/7/5/3/17531595/license_to_carry_application.pdf)
I think you and Funtimes are talking about two different forms. The one you have linked is for Hawaii County and not Honolulu County.
-
I like to say Congratulations to Chris, and the team of attorneys, Mr. Holcomb, and Mr. Beck. Making Hawaii that much safer for work and play. :shaka:
-
Actually it does differ. Asked for what job requires you to carry a firearm, signature of Employer from that company etc.
http://www.konaguns.com/uploads/1/7/5/3/17531595/license_to_carry_application.pdf (http://www.konaguns.com/uploads/1/7/5/3/17531595/license_to_carry_application.pdf)
I have copies of all islands carry forms and additional documents that are required for you to fill out. They have another application as well. HDF utilized the UIPA act to get all of this correspondence. We had to team up with the ACLU and threaten to sue Kauai and Honolulu for failure to release our records.
-
Can you post them up so everyone can see?
-
Can you post them up so everyone can see?
I will add it to my list of things. I'm pretty sure we posted them some where when we got them, but it might have been on my other computer too. I need to get the hard copies together.
HPD utilizes a serial # sheet, so that's why they say they can't give em online or over the phone. One fix to this is having lots of people get the forms etc.
-
.
-
Well if Q, new guy, and the Admins want nobody else to post their thoughts on the 2nd Amendment cases percolating in the court systems that is fine with me.
"New guy" and "Q" show a proclivity towards personal attacks on me ever since they claimed that it was illegal to carry a knife and I disputed that assertion proving they were totally incorrect. Telling members they can't do something that is perfectly legal was just plain stupid.
Go Ahead and slag me all day and night if you want, this is the internet so if net rage is your thing, I am immune & could care less. I will not return insults.
Have a nice day all. GOODBYE GOOD LUCK :shaka:
-
:stopjack: :stopjack: :stopjack:
-
.
-
:popcorn:
-
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3rc9tUnP81r559vso2_500.gif)
-
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3rc9tUnP81r559vso2_500.gif)
real genius ren... real genius :rofl:
-
I like that popcorn gif! :O
-
I printed a copy for the Big Island carry permit. Do we really HAVE TO have a reason to carry? Or can it be just self protection plain and simple. What should be my purpose? I am a former ACO and now Deputy Sheriff E.H. Is that purpose enough?? I CAN be issued a permit by law BUT..... L.T. will not issue a permit to any E.H. Just wondering Funtimes. Any help would be appreciated.
-
I printed a copy for the Big Island carry permit. Do we really HAVE TO have a reason to carry? Or can it be just self protection plain and simple. What should be my purpose? I am a former ACO and now Deputy Sheriff E.H. Is that purpose enough?? I CAN be issued a permit by law BUT..... L.T. will not issue a permit to any E.H. Just wondering Funtimes. Any help would be appreciated.
I'd just wait. I will be everything that no matter what you put, you will be denied up and until we get an order from Judge Kay here at home. At that point, all you will need to put is self-defense.
-
This is the timeline. The Defendants have 7 more days to file for en banc.. I agree with Chris that the City does not have the desire to keep going.
The State which really means the AG's office is a unknown. They've been getting pressure to work. They asked for and were dismissed from the suit. So they do not automatically get to intervene but there is a strong chance they can if they want to.
If they do not file for en banc in 7 days then 7 days later a mandate is issued from the Ninth Circuit and we can proceed with the lower court.
At that point their only option would be to file for a writ to the Supreme Court.
They have 90 days to do so from the date of the decision
I highly doubt that the lower Court will rule on anything filed until after that 90 days is up.
However we will have filed a MSJ which the lower court must rule in our favor on if the case proceeds in the lower court.
Either Chris or I will update this thread at the relevant times.
If I had to guess this will be over in 3-4 months
However the AG's office may put in some work.
.
-
This is the timeline. ...
Wolfwood, thanks for the update on the timeline/details. :shaka:
-
This is the timeline. The Defendants have 7 more days to file for en banc.. I agree with Chris that the City does not have the desire to keep going.
The State which really means the AG's office is a unknown. They've been getting pressure to work. They asked for and were dismissed from the suit. So they do not automatically get to intervene but there is a strong chance they can if they want to.
If they do not file for en banc in 7 days then 7 days later a mandate is issued from the Ninth Circuit and we can proceed with the lower court.
At that point their only option would be to file for a writ to the Supreme Court.
They have 90 days to do so from the date of the decision
I highly doubt that the lower Court will rule on anything filed until after that 90 days is up.
However we will have filed a MSJ which the lower court must rule in our favor on if the case proceeds in the lower court.
Either Chris or I will update this thread at the relevant times.
If I had to guess this will be over in 3-4 months
However the AG's office may put in some work.
.
Thank you sir for taking the time to update the masses. Much appreciated and I as many others will continue to look for your updates and direction to move this forward favorably.
-
I printed a copy for the Big Island carry permit. Do we really HAVE TO have a reason to carry? Or can it be just self protection plain and simple. What should be my purpose? I am a former ACO and now Deputy Sheriff E.H. Is that purpose enough?? I CAN be issued a permit by law BUT..... L.T. will not issue a permit to any E.H. Just wondering Funtimes. Any help would be appreciated.
If I remember right .... New Hampshire suggests 'all lawful purposes' in their instructions as a valid reason for a permit. But I'd take Chris' advice and wait.
-
If I remember right .... New Hampshire suggests 'all lawful purposes' in their instructions as a valid reason for a permit. But I'd take Chris' advice and wait.
I like Vermont's (unstated) suggestion: "What license/permit? You don't need no stinking permit/license." :geekdanc:
-
Thank you Funtimes and wolfweed, I will take your advice and wait. Oh I'm sorry, wolfwood. :( :(
-
This is the timeline. The Defendants have 7 more days to file for en banc.. I agree with Chris that the City does not have the desire to keep going.
The State which really means the AG's office is a unknown. They've been getting pressure to work. They asked for and were dismissed from the suit. So they do not automatically get to intervene but there is a strong chance they can if they want to.
If they do not file for en banc in 7 days then 7 days later a mandate is issued from the Ninth Circuit and we can proceed with the lower court.
At that point their only option would be to file for a writ to the Supreme Court.
They have 90 days to do so from the date of the decision
I highly doubt that the lower Court will rule on anything filed until after that 90 days is up.
However we will have filed a MSJ which the lower court must rule in our favor on if the case proceeds in the lower court.
Either Chris or I will update this thread at the relevant times.
If I had to guess this will be over in 3-4 months
However the AG's office may put in some work.
.
Thank you for the clarification and HARD WORK!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :shaka: