2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: macsak on November 30, 2017, 10:52:41 AM
-
https://ag.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/News-Release-2017-146.pdf
-
Too small to see on my phone. Must be related to HR 38?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
It is a joke that the protest letter says all 50 states already allow concealed carry. Who in Hawaii other than LEOs? Doug Chin, as AG, is supposed to be the highest ranking LEO in the state. I assume he has the right to CC? Those in power, like in many other things, say it is OK for me, but not for you.
-
He lost all credibility when he invoked the anti-gun terminology, "We will resist any efforts by the federal government to turn our state into the Wild West..."
No state with CCW, including constitutional carry, have experienced this fictitious "Wild West" scenario.
-
It is a joke that the protest letter says all 50 states already allow concealed carry. Who in Hawaii other than LEOs? Doug Chin, as AG, is supposed to be the highest ranking LEO in the state. I assume he has the right to CC? Those in power, like in many other things, say it is OK for me, but not for you.
Ok, if all states already allow concealed carry, then there should be no issue with getting permits in other states and using them in hawaii right? I dont even know how people tell these sort of lies and sleep at night. Hawaii is notorious for issuing NO permits, and is the only may-issue state that has that distinction. At least other gun control states issue a few hundred permits or so.
-
He lost all credibility when he invoked the anti-gun terminology, "We will resist any efforts by the federal government to turn our state into the Wild West..."
No state with CCW, including constitutional carry, have experienced this fictitious "Wild West" scenario.
Does he realize that to legally carry, the individual still needs to comply with handgun ownership requirements, which includes passing state/federal background checks? In addition to that, the permit holder undergoes additional training and certification. Of course he does, but he's full of it.
-
Does he realize that to legally carry, the individual still needs to comply with handgun ownership requirements, which includes passing state/federal background checks? In addition to that, the permit holder undergoes additional training and certification. Of course he does, but he's full of it.
Actually, that's not true.
National reciprocity means you can only be sure of your own residents having training. Visitors coming from other states won't necessarily have the same CCW requirements.
-
It kills me reading the stuff that these guys spew. And to have all those Attorney General signatures who don't even know the constitution.
"We would not mandate that one State honor another’s fishing, liquor, or hunting permits, yet the proposed legislation applies that same flawed approach..."
What the hell does some random State's laws regarding fishing or drinking booze have anything to do with 2A? Drinking isn't a constitutional right... 2A is. So the approach isn't flawed at all.
-
Actually, that's not true.
National reciprocity means you can only be sure of your own residents having training. Visitors coming from other states won't necessarily have the same CCW requirements.
Ok, I'll give you that. :) They'll have whatever requirements there are for CCW in their own state, which may or may not include training.
-
Ok, I'll give you that. :) They'll have whatever requirements there are for CCW in their own state, which may or may not include training.
I think the federal CCW law would have more support if they included a training component. The problem arises when those training standards are being discussed. Who decides on duration, content, amount of live fire, grading, etc? Can't make it too tough, because it'll deny you a constitutional right. Can't make it too easy, or it'll be a waste of time.
Maybe a blanket statement that there must be some CCW training to include familiarization with use of deadly force, federal and local laws, live fire skills, proper safe handling and holstering/drawing, and other basics any gun user should know.
In short, an NRA-certified CCW class. Leave it at that, and trust the NRA to make the courses not only adequate for safety, but also consistent nationwide.
Just a thought.
-
I think the federal CCW law would have more support if they included a training component. The problem arises when those training standards are being discussed. Who decides on duration, content, amount of live fire, grading, etc? Can't make it too tough, because it'll deny you a constitutional right. Can't make it too easy, or it'll be a waste of time.
Maybe a blanket statement that there must be some CCW training to include familiarization with use of deadly force, federal and local laws, live fire skills, proper safe handling and holstering/drawing, and other basics any gun user should know.
In short, an NRA-certified CCW class. Leave it at that, and trust the NRA to make the courses not only adequate for safety, but also consistent nationwide.
Just a thought.
If they mandated training classes, it still wouldn't fly by Chin. He would still object to it. If you look at the AG's that signed it, all the states that rarely issue permits signed it. NY, CA, IL, MA.
The entire letter is full of it. "HPD will have to make tough decisions who's allowed to carry". I guess he thinks HPD is not competent enough to figure stuff out? But the other states who allows CCW, their PD are competent enough.
-
I think the federal CCW law would have more support if they included a training component. The problem arises when those training standards are being discussed. Who decides on duration, content, amount of live fire, grading, etc? Can't make it too tough, because it'll deny you a constitutional right. Can't make it too easy, or it'll be a waste of time.
Maybe a blanket statement that there must be some CCW training to include familiarization with use of deadly force, federal and local laws, live fire skills, proper safe handling and holstering/drawing, and other basics any gun user should know.
In short, an NRA-certified CCW class. Leave it at that, and trust the NRA to make the courses not only adequate for safety, but also consistent nationwide.
Just a thought.
I agree with the fact that a national minimum training level would go a long ways, and is ideal for both the ccw holder and the people around him. Who knows, they may incorporate it into the bill before all is said and done.
That being said, however, there are pro-gun states that would absolutely fight any sort of nationalized training. By doing this, you'd lose support of the 8 no permit states, and probably half of the red states currently supporting the bill. And my personal opinion is that a training curriculum is strongly encouraged and ideal for everyone considering concealed carry, but should not be necessary for a law abiding citizen to exercise their gun rights - which include ccw. Part of the problem with mandatory training is that it opens the door to liberals throwing in all sorts of BS training requirements, recertification, sign offs by the state, insurance requirements, whatever into it. And liberals would not be happy with the NRA certified class since they do not trust the NRA.
-
If they mandated training classes, it still wouldn't fly by Chin. He would still object to it. If you look at the AG's that signed it, all the states that rarely issue permits signed it. NY, CA, IL, MA.
The entire letter is full of it. "HPD will have to make tough decisions who's allowed to carry". I guess he thinks HPD is not competent enough to figure stuff out? But the other states who allows CCW, their PD are competent enough.
What decision is there to make? Similar to a handgun permit, if the individual takes the training, passes the background screening, etc. they're allow to carry. Hell, the decision is almost as easy as saying "no" to every CCW permit application.
-
What decision is there to make? Similar to a handgun permit, if the individual takes the training, passes the background screening, etc. they're allow to carry.
Our law makers at any point could implement a training requirement that would allow for CCW, but haven't. The "wild west" fear and argument would still be made.
-
The nra has a course called personal protection outsidè the home. It is exactly what I think we should have here as a prerequisite for a ccw permit.
Like I said many times before, AG Chin is a weasel to look out for.
That letter is so full of b.s. it should be archived in the fiction section at the library.
-
Old news, The letter was published when the Bill went into committee .
-
After reading the letter again, he's wasting his time. We all know our senators are going to vote against HR38 anyways (Hirono, Schatz, Hanabusa, unsure about Gabbard).
He just wants his name in the paper again to move his career after he's done being AG.
-
After reading the letter again, he's wasting his time. We all know our senators are going to vote against HR38 anyways (Hirono, Schatz, Hanabusa, unsure about Gabbard).
He just wants his name in the paper again to move his career after he's done being AG.
https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/2017.10.22_ags_opposed_to_conceal_carry_reciprocity_w_sigs.pdf
~15 AGs (blue states of course), and Chin was part of it wrote a letter of protest against the reciprocity bill a month ago as it was seriously starting to be considered by the House.
-
Penn AG signed it, but PA is 2A friendly . CCW's are $25 and a pulse; good for 5 years . No training required, show have your ID and checkbook ready.
-
Screw AG Chin-nuts!
Self serving SOB
-
I have mixed feelings about having a training requirement.
I think more people than not aren't prepared training wise to carry safely and effectively. I attended a class that I wouldn't stay with half of the class if they were legally carrying. I have friends that acquired out of state permits with no training at all. Many that get theirs when visiting Vegas have minimal training. A family member shot 20 rounds live fire during their class.
On the other hand, I feel even if you can't afford proper training, I feel you should have the right to defend yourself and your love ones.
-
I have mixed feelings about having a training requirement.
I think more people than not aren't prepared training wise to carry safely and effectively. I attended a class that I wouldn't stay with half of the class if they were legally carrying. I have friends that acquired out of state permits with no training at all. Many that get theirs when visiting Vegas have minimal training. A family member shot 20 rounds live fire during their class.
On the other hand, I feel even if you can't afford proper training, I feel you should have the right to defend yourself and your love ones.
"A well regulated militia ..." means well trained. I think if we as a society are happy to exercise our rights, we should be just as happy to abide by our responsibilities regarding those rights.
If we ever do need to fight tyranny, I want a bunch of citizen soldiers who can hit what they shoot at and not accidentally shoot themselves or other citizen soldiers, just because they were too lazy or cheap to take training courses.
-
Very sad the mentality that law enforcement has here, and I'm not used to it.
In Texas, I view cops as my friends. We are on the same side. I hang out with many of them, and they believe in the 2nd amendment with ZERO exceptions, even thinking the current federal level laws are bull shit. I would not hesitate to help any of them in need if I happen to see something while I have a gun on me (all the time in Texas)
The more I am back here, the more I view cops not as my friends. They aren't my enemy here at all either, but they are something kind of in the middle? They are above me, and that is very sad, and a very unusual feeling. I don't feel the warm feeling towards them that I have almost my entire life in Texas. Perhaps I am wrong? And they are actually good ol boys too? I sure hope so. Please, tell me I am wrong.
Bullshit like this keeps those feelings in me.
I'm glad to be back in Kauai with zero regrets, but as with living anywhere in the world, there are going to be things you don't like. Here, this is a big one.
-
I think it is always better to have as much training as you can as well as knowing the self defense laws of your state
but I also do not think that training should be part of HR 38
some states do not require training for CC permits
i don't believe in more requirements or regulations on CC permits any more than what already exists, as this would make it take longer to decide: what is sufficient training to get CC permits. deciding could take months, years maybe if the democrats hold it up like you know they would
if we can pass it without training, then pass the HR38 without it
"the right of the people to own and bear arms shall not be infringed."
adding training and rules and regulations is a form of infringement.
the 2A doesn['t say anything about needing training.
if we have enough votes to pass HR38 as it is, then we should proceed with it as it is.
-
Hard to make a case for absolutely no infringement. If that's the case, then criminals have a right to have guns.
I don't think training should be mandatory, but it should be promoted more by gun organizations and government. Penaltys should be enforced if someone screws up.
I don't think Chins letter will make any difference, should pass. I still prefer a SCOTUS ruling over this bill.
-
Very sad the mentality that law enforcement has here, and I'm not used to it.
In Texas, I view cops as my friends. We are on the same side. I hang out with many of them, and they believe in the 2nd amendment with ZERO exceptions, even thinking the current federal level laws are bull shit. I would not hesitate to help any of them in need if I happen to see something while I have a gun on me (all the time in Texas)
The more I am back here, the more I view cops not as my friends. They aren't my enemy here at all either, but they are something kind of in the middle? They are above me, and that is very sad, and a very unusual feeling. I don't feel the warm feeling towards them that I have almost my entire life in Texas. Perhaps I am wrong? And they are actually good ol boys too? I sure hope so. Please, tell me I am wrong.
Bullshit like this keeps those feelings in me.
I'm glad to be back in Kauai with zero regrets, but as with living anywhere in the world, there are going to be things you don't like. Here, this is a big one.
There are quite a few pro2A officers but they are not that vocal about it because of the City administration's view of the 2A. That's my experience and observations.
-
Hard to make a case for absolutely no infringement. If that's the case, then criminals have a right to have guns.
I don't think training should be mandatory, but it should be promoted more by gun organizations and government. Penaltys should be enforced if someone screws up.
I don't think Chins letter will make any difference, should pass. I still prefer a SCOTUS ruling over this bill.
My opinion on that is that "people" means law abiding citizens. "We the people". It doesn't mean terrorists, criminals, illegals, drug dealers, murderers, etc
-
Hard to make a case for absolutely no infringement. If that's the case, then criminals have a right to have guns.
I don't think training should be mandatory, but it should be promoted more by gun organizations and government. Penaltys should be enforced if someone screws up.
I don't think Chins letter will make any difference, should pass. I still prefer a SCOTUS ruling over this bill.
I've also thought about "shall not be infringed" and criminals. I read that if someone is truly rehabilitated, then why not give them their 2a right back? But the problem is with over crowding and budgets, majority of released criminals are not "rehabilitated" because 70% return to prison within 2 years.
But on the other hand, criminals/convicts don't just lose 1 right (2a), but many. You can't vote while in prison/probation, search and seizure (4a) doesn't apply (shake downs), they lose their 1a (can't protest much while in prison). And probably many more rights they lose. So it's more fair across the board.
-
I've also thought about "shall not be infringed" and criminals. I read that if someone is truly rehabilitated, then why not give them their 2a right back? But the problem is with over crowding and budgets, majority of released criminals are not "rehabilitated" because 70% return to prison within 2 years.
But on the other hand, criminals/convicts don't just lose 1 right (2a), but many. You can't vote while in prison/probation, search and seizure (4a) doesn't apply (shake downs), they lose their 1a (can't protest much while in prison). And probably many more rights they lose. So it's more fair across the board.
All good points.
I wonder how the founding fathers dealt with this.
Surely they had these types in society
-
"A well regulated militia ..." means well trained. I think if we as a society are happy to exercise our rights, we should be just as happy to abide by our responsibilities regarding those rights.
If we ever do need to fight tyranny, I want a bunch of citizen soldiers who can hit what they shoot at and not accidentally shoot themselves or other citizen soldiers, just because they were too lazy or cheap to take training courses.
I agree with this statement. The 2nd ensures that we always have access to firearms so that we may train in the hopes of using them to stave off tyranny.
I would add that if a law requires a class/training, that classes must be minimal and the test separate from the class, meaning that you can attempt the test without taking the class if you have the skills already. The passing grade must be attainable by the "average reasonably trained person" and if you pass, you must be granted the permit unless you are otherwise prohibited (ie: a felon etc). None of this BS about passing the test and then "we will let you know". As far as how good an "average person" is, I can't put that into words but I don't want the test to be "can you shoot like Jerry Miculek in his prime?, no...fail. :grrr: This whole "may issue" crap is a load of kaka.
And we know that if the local lawmakers are left to design the system, they will make the class cost $1000, only offer it once a year on voting day (reducing our numbers at the pole), make the passing grade so difficult that nobody will pass.
-
Do you guys think the government is really concerned that we are well trained enough to overthrow the government?
Why do you think States are banning "military" style weapons.
Well regulated militia?
How trained were they at Lexington and Concord?
But they had each other and they had their guns and their principles.
Now that's well regulated
Shall Not Be Infringed.
Wolverines !
P.S. For CCW, I do agree with a test and passing the test as Rusty suggests. Like Hunter's Ed. But if you can pass it without a class, you pass. Then it's shall issue. Great idea Rusty.
-
duplicate post. (Somehow posted my same post again) Dammit. :oops:
Thinking about it, I think Rusty's really on to something.
-
https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/2017.10.22_ags_opposed_to_conceal_carry_reciprocity_w_sigs.pdf
~15 AGs (blue states of course), and Chin was part of it wrote a letter of protest against the reciprocity bill a month ago as it was seriously starting to be considered by the House.
Counter-letter from 24 AGs writing in support of HR38. The states signing the letter are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
https://www.stl.news/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/AG-Concealed-Carry-Ltr.pdf
-
For those saying training, how's about the concept of training equal to law enforcement standards?
Not sure how uniform or un uniform they are across the states though but you get the concept
-
The State should offer that kind of training, like Hunter's Ed.
CCW Ed.
Private courses can still be offered in addition.
But I still like Rusty's idea in addition to that.
There are guys with beaucoup training.
They take the test and pass, they pass.
2 parts. Laws and live fire.
-
if you impose a training mandatory regulation, those states that do not require training will have to change their requirements and all their permit carriers will have to retake their permits again. those people will not be happy campers.
and it'll take time for those states to come up with a test for their permits. this is all extra time that we probably don't even need.
what if you are handicapped or elderly and cannot pass that required test, then they cannot have a CC permit.
so when they go to the gas station or ATM or the local pharmacy, they are now unable to protect themselves.
I'm all for training. don't get me wrong, training can only help you and the others around you. i get it.
but as a requirement for CC, i don't think its necessary.
those states like AZ, and others that don't require training, how often are CC permit holders screwing up and shooting bystanders or shooting themselves in the butt, or whatever.
are there even statistics on things like that?
if we already have the votes to pass this through as it is, why make it harder on ourselves to get it passed?
when it does pass the house vote, and the senate vote, will you guys still be pushing for training to be required?
-
if you impose a training mandatory regulation, those states that do not require training will have to change their requirements and all their permit carriers will have to retake their permits again. those people will not be happy campers.
and it'll take time for those states to come up with a test for their permits. this is all extra time that we probably don't even need.
what if you are handicapped or elderly and cannot pass that required test, then they cannot have a CC permit.
so when they go to the gas station or ATM or the local pharmacy, they are now unable to protect themselves.
I'm all for training. don't get me wrong, training can only help you and the others around you. i get it.
but as a requirement for CC, i don't think its necessary.
those states like AZ, and others that don't require training, how often are CC permit holders screwing up and shooting bystanders or shooting themselves in the butt, or whatever.
are there even statistics on things like that?
if we already have the votes to pass this through as it is, why make it harder on ourselves to get it passed?
when it does pass the house vote, and the senate vote, will you guys still be pushing for training to be required?
^
Agreed. Like I said earlier, if you attempt to impose mandatory training, it'll be open to abuse by the liberals as to the requirements. And you're going to alienate probably half of your support base for the bill. Not everyone lives in a highly restricted state like hawaii where we're used to all sorts of mandatory requirements and rules. All the support we're getting from no permit and low requirement CC states is going to evaporate if you start throwing in new requirements and regulations.
-
What Stangz said ! :thumbsup:
So long as there is no state of residence requirement.
I was talking about getting Hawaii to be willing to issue in state permits to residents.
Otherwise we all gotta get out of state permits.
Just thought about it. Out of state permits is better.
No Rapback!
-
What Stangz said ! :thumbsup:
So long as there is no state of residence requirement.
I was talking about getting Hawaii to be willing to issue in state permits to residents.
Otherwise we all gotta get out of state permits.
Just thought about it. Out of state permits is better.
No Rapback!
Assuming this thing passes, hawaii would be smart to offer reasonable requirements for CC permits in-state. That way, they can be assured that most hawaii residents will have decent training (like the handgun training).
If they make their requirements to arduous, costly, mandatory yearly recertification and requalification, too many idiotic hoops to jump through, etc people are just going to get out of state ones. BUT hawaii always does shit ass-backwards, so I anticipate having to get mine out of state, maybe when I go vegas.
-
"Under the legislation, our residents would lose the protections that their legislators and law enforcement agencies have deemed appropriate" ???
Do you currently feel "appropriately" protected ? ::)
I don't, and if you've seen what's happened in this state over the last 5-7 years, you know that we're turning into the mainland as far as violent crime go's. :shake: :shake: :shake:
-
"Under the legislation, our residents would lose the protections that their legislators and law enforcement agencies have deemed appropriate" ???
Do you currently feel "appropriately" protected ? ::)
I don't, and if you've seen what's happened in this state over the last 5-7 years, you know that we're turning into the mainland as far as violent crime go's. :shake: :shake: :shake:
In summary, he said that THEY have dictated our personal security measures, because our state has done such a wonderful job of protecting us from crazy people :wacko: :oops: :grrr:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/16/us/hawaii-patient-captured-randall-saito.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/16/us/hawaii-patient-captured-randall-saito.html)
-
Doug Chin is an asshole.
-
All good points.
I wonder how the founding fathers dealt with this.
Surely they had these types in society
Those laws taking 2nd Amendment and voting rights were old "Jim Crowe Laws" to keep black men from having rights.
All they had to do is arrest and convict on anything, now the guy is a felon and can no longer vote, no longer own any firearm. "The Man" is still using those laws to this day to keep people down...
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
-
I have been reading up on Doug Chin and he's been in his current office since March 2015. Haven't heard of him then all of a sudden, Trump is elected and bam, he's all over the news.
-
I have been reading up on Doug Chin and he's been in his current office since March 2015. Haven't heard of him then all of a sudden, Trump is elected and bam, he's all over the news.
Some democrat probably approached him to run for a higher office once he's done here. He's doing what he's doing to get on the dems good side and his name in the paper.
-
I have been reading up on Doug Chin and he's been in his current office since March 2015. Haven't heard of him then all of a sudden, Trump is elected and bam, he's all over the news.
...
Ag Chin and judge Watson....Obama puppets
-
Some democrat probably approached him to run for a higher office once he's done here. He's doing what he's doing to get on the dems good side and his name in the paper.
Yeah. That’s pretty much my thoughts and that he’ll probably succeed. In a way, I hope stuff blows up in his face, but think lots of crap needs to happen to do so.
-
http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/12/13/hawaii-news/state-attorney-general-eyes-congress/?HSA=1c788ae5cee503206911275ac2082b00e205c0c3
looks like he's running for the house. good riddance I say. Honestly he probably does more damage as AG than if he were on a republican majority house
-
http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/12/13/hawaii-news/state-attorney-general-eyes-congress/?HSA=1c788ae5cee503206911275ac2082b00e205c0c3
looks like he's running for the house. good riddance I say. Honestly he probably does more damage as AG than if he were on a republican majority house
Article is full of it. "he has not been in the political establishment". Everything he has been doing this year is for a political agenda. And his travel ban ruling was deemed wrong by the supreme court.
-
Article is full of it. "he has not been in the political establishment". Everything he has been doing this year is for a political agenda. And his travel ban ruling was deemed wrong by the supreme court.
That’l establishment part was what I was getting at regarding not hearing anything about him until recently. I’m not the most informed when it comes to stuff like this, but at least to me, he was a relative nobody.
-
Article in the paper does say he is reluctant to resign to campaign as he has received more publicity as AG opposing Trump than he could by campaigning.
What an Ass.
Mac called it months ago.
-
Article in the paper does say he is reluctant to resign to campaign as he has received more publicity as AG opposing Trump than he could by campaigning.
What an Ass.
Mac called it months ago.
they're reluctant to resign because they dont want to give up their position if they lose. hababooza did the same thing before. IMO it should be a mandatory requirement to resign.
-
Article in the paper does say he is reluctant to resign to campaign as he has received more publicity as AG opposing Trump than he could by campaigning.
What an Ass.
Mac called it months ago.
Well thats a negative if you look at it from a bi partisan perspective. Doesnt respect leadership. Not a team player. Why should we vote for a guy like that? Immature. A perfect example of gen "me".
-
Disappointed in our media s they are rehashing old news to get his name out there again. :grrr:
-
He's resigning in 2 months to campaign for congress. good riddance
-
all that anti Trump admin stuff was all just hype for his campaign
I hope everyone see through his BS and don't take us all for fools with his circus act.
-
Disappointed in our media s they are rehashing old news to get his name out there again. :grrr:
Probably getting paid to do so, so people hear the name and it sounds familiar, so they vote for him.
-
Probably getting paid to do so, so people hear the name and it sounds familiar, so they vote for him.
=========
All kidding aside, the media doesn't have to get paid to put dog chin on the air. He generates a lot of fake news all by himself and the news outlets have to cover it.
I'm pretty sure he is being coached by Obama. I don't think it's a coincidence that every time Obama sneaks into Honolulu quietly, Chin appears in the news shortly thereafter.
Don't be surprised if Obama comes out to support his bid for office.
Chin is a weasel of the worst kind...a politically connected weasel.
He commandeered the HPD video guys to create free TV spots for him under the guise of public service announcements.
Therefore he got free video production PLUS free air time across the TV stations.
His so-called "public service announcements" were absolutely nothing of any importance. It was just an excuse to request free air time and get his face on TV.