Post by: aletheuo137 on November 03, 2021, 10:39:45 AM
The U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to strike down a restrictive New York gun permitting law, which would be a major win for the Second Amendment and gun rights.
The nation’s highest court heard arguments in its biggest guns case in more than a decade, which involves a dispute over whether New York’s law violates the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”
Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk
Post by: Inspector on November 03, 2021, 10:50:51 AM
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 03, 2021, 11:40:36 AM
Post by: aieahound on November 03, 2021, 12:09:13 PM
Some interesting, possibly even encouraging, questions from the Justices being reported.
Post by: macsak on November 05, 2021, 03:36:20 PM
Post by: keahi on November 05, 2021, 08:16:19 PM
Post by: hvybarrels on November 05, 2021, 09:01:29 PM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 05, 2021, 09:21:27 PM
ACB sure has turned out to be a disappointment.
What did you expect her to do that she hasn't?
What has she done that you didn't want her to?
She made some comments, but not as part of the final decision. I think it's premature to pounce on her right now.
As for the Times Square thing.... I agree that states have the authority to restrict places where one may not carry -- bars, courthouses, inside the offices of public officials, etc. If that's where they want to draw the line, I can see how places that serve booze and involve sometimes emotional events and meetings might not be the best places for firearms in the mix.
Anyone who doesn't agree is free to stay away from the places they can't carry. Many people do that with businesses that prohibit CCW.
People being packed in like Times Square on New Year's Eve not only involves a bunch of drunks, but if someone starts shooting for whatever reason, the stampede alone could result in dozens of deaths and injuries.
So, before jumping on her for that comment, we need to realize that the federal Constitution gives us the right, but it also gives the states to right to pass laws placing limits on those rights as long as they don't violate the Constitution.
Post by: omnigun on November 05, 2021, 10:14:53 PM
Post by: hvybarrels on November 05, 2021, 10:56:03 PM
What did you expect her to do that she hasn't?
What has she done that you didn't want her to?
She made some comments, but not as part of the final decision. I think it's premature to pounce on her right now.
As for the Times Square thing.... I agree that states have the authority to restrict places where one may not carry -- bars, courthouses, inside the offices of public officials, etc. If that's where they want to draw the line, I can see how places that serve booze and involve sometimes emotional events and meetings might not be the best places for firearms in the mix.
Anyone who doesn't agree is free to stay away from the places they can't carry. Many people do that with businesses that prohibit CCW.
People being packed in like Times Square on New Year's Eve not only involves a bunch of drunks, but if someone starts shooting for whatever reason, the stampede alone could result in dozens of deaths and injuries.
So, before jumping on her for that comment, we need to realize that the federal Constitution gives us the right, but it also gives the states to right to pass laws placing limits on those rights as long as they don't violate the Constitution.
First she punted on election fraud, and now she's doing a creative reinterpretation of the constitution.
At least RGB had some convictions. ACB will apparently roll over and do whatever the status quo wants.
Times square in New Years is exactly where I want a gun, along with everywhere else in the country for that matter now that Democratic goon squads are apparently free to assault citizens with no consequences, crime rates are skyrocketing, and we have an invasion of narco terrorist slave traders pouring across the southern border.
Get with the program, son. There is no middle ground any more.
Post by: aieahound on November 05, 2021, 11:05:02 PM
Or not ?
London…Mac…CMO.
Re: effect on Young v. Hawaii and CCW. Or Open.
Gotta wait for decision ?
Andrew :thumbsup: looked good on TV.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 06, 2021, 01:10:18 AM
First she punted on election fraud, and now she's doing a creative reinterpretation of the constitution.
At least RGB had some convictions. ACB will apparently roll over and do whatever the status quo wants.
Times square in New Years is exactly where I want a gun, along with everywhere else in the country for that matter now that Democratic goon squads are apparently free to assault citizens with no consequences, crime rates are skyrocketing, and we have an invasion of narco terrorist slave traders pouring across the southern border.
Get with the program, son. There is no middle ground any more.
Where did I say there is a middle ground? The Constitution protects the rights of of the people AND the rights of the individual states. If the state decides to restrict WHERE you can exercise a right, as long as that restriction doesn't make it impossible for you to exercise your individual rights, your rights are intact.
If you want to be an absolutist when talking individual rights, I can handle that. I like when rules are short, simple and completely understandable. The issue is, the Constitution creates a framework, not a user's manual. Some of the components are in direct opposition and must maintain a balance. The needs of the many vs. the needs of the few is not just a Star Trek meme.
I get where you're coming from, and that pendulum that swung toward gun control since the 1930s is now swinging the other way. But that arc isn't going to happen instantaneously. It took 90 years for it to swing to the current apex. It's going to take time and effort to see that it's allowed to continue on this new arc toward the kind of America we want as it relates to firearms.
We all seem to want the same thing -- less violence. We just have to convince the other side that trying to make everyone helpless isn't going to make anyone harmless.
Post by: Heavies on November 06, 2021, 04:37:02 AM
Post by: Inspector on November 06, 2021, 04:45:06 AM
Hoping for CCW in Hawaii by 2022This inspires me to write about my journey into concealed carry and open carry since I moved to AZ. I have made plenty of mistakes as well as doing some things right. Maybe if I find some time I will write a little bit about it.
Post by: Heavies on November 06, 2021, 04:48:33 AM
This inspires me to write about my journey into concealed carry and open carry since I moved to AZ. I have made plenty of mistakes as well as doing some things right. Maybe if I find some time I will write a little bit about it.
That would be great Inspector. That’s some good information people in Hawaii will need, hopefully very very soon. :thumbsup:
Post by: QUIETShooter on November 06, 2021, 06:28:39 AM
Hoping for CCW in Hawaii by 2022
I think this place in Mililani Town Center is already preparing for it. I walked past this place (I think it was an insurance office or something) and there was this prominent sign on the door for all to see:
NO WEAPONS, FIREARMS, OR EXPLOSIVES ALLOWED ON PREMISES
;D
So funny. I had a good laugh. I guess this business will close up soon since no one here does anything illegal.
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 06, 2021, 07:16:06 AM
Is this Great!London left the forum a while ago.
Or not ?
London…Mac…CMO.
Re: effect on Young v. Hawaii and CCW. Or Open.
Gotta wait for decision ?
Andrewlooked good on TV.
Idk much about scotus statements and how it affects how they will rule. So i will have to wait. But for now, what worries me is if they rule the states can use reasonable restrictions, then HI will focus on this and find ways to ban guns.
Example no guns in places that serve booze. U cannot leave ur gun in ur car in HI. Which means u gotta leave ur gun at home if u decide to go out and eat. Which is a "make life difficult" type of ban.
Then theres the federal school zone ban. Which means a parent dropping off their child must lock the gun when coming within 1k feet of a school. Unless u have that states issued ccw. I expect HI law makers to make similar laws like this. Defacto bans.
So although it sounds reasonable to ban guns in certain places, due to HI and other states who are anti 2a and dont abide by the constitution, a ruling that supports this would lead to more gun control years down the road. Which means our children and grandchildren would have to pick up where we left off and ask why didnt we do anything to stop this types of rulings. This is why if they do rule in this manner, i cannot support it.
I also thought the constitution is so the government cannot suppress ur rights. Private entities can do as they please. So aloha stadium is owned by hawaiian airlines. They can say no guns allowed. Blazedell is owned by the C&C, so they cannot say no guns.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Post by: omnigun on November 06, 2021, 07:19:10 AM
Post by: macsak on November 06, 2021, 07:59:19 AM
Is this Great!
Or not ?
London…Mac…CMO.
Re: effect on Young v. Hawaii and CCW. Or Open.
Gotta wait for decision ?
Andrew :thumbsup: looked good on TV.
young is stayed pending this decision
basically, a supreme court ruling in this case means the same applies to HI
will have to go to the legislature and police depts to change the law and determine the rules
young pertains to open carry, the thought is that HI will not want to have people visibly strapped, so they may allow concealed carry
my prediction is that the leg and PDs will impose lots of fees and required classes/testing and mandatory insurance...
Post by: hvybarrels on November 06, 2021, 09:33:34 AM
Where did I say there is a middle ground? The Constitution protects the rights of of the people AND the rights of the individual states. If the state decides to restrict WHERE you can exercise a right, as long as that restriction doesn't make it impossible for you to exercise your individual rights, your rights are intact.
If you want to be an absolutist when talking individual rights, I can handle that. I like when rules are short, simple and completely understandable. The issue is, the Constitution creates a framework, not a user's manual. Some of the components are in direct opposition and must maintain a balance. The needs of the many vs. the needs of the few is not just a Star Trek meme.
I get where you're coming from, and that pendulum that swung toward gun control since the 1930s is now swinging the other way. But that arc isn't going to happen instantaneously. It took 90 years for it to swing to the current apex. It's going to take time and effort to see that it's allowed to continue on this new arc toward the kind of America we want as it relates to firearms.
We all seem to want the same thing -- less violence. We just have to convince the other side that trying to make everyone helpless isn't going to make anyone harmless.
It would be one thing if we weren't currently experiencing an attempted Corporate Communist coup d'état where they are literally locking up and torturing trespassers because of their patriotic political beliefs.
You can't give these people an inch to say "here is okay but there is not okay".
They will creatively interpret the laws to make sure it is not okay anywhere, and then declare anyone who disagrees with them a terrorist.
If it wasn't for 2A then Hawaii and the rest of the USA would be just another locked down dictatorship like Australia, NZ, and Europe.
The history lesson is over. We know what the real purpose of gun control is.
Post by: QUIETShooter on November 06, 2021, 10:52:29 AM
About Hawaii and the nation turning into the Wild Wild West.
Post by: drck1000 on November 06, 2021, 10:54:34 AM
There's always that comment the gun control advocates mention.Prob still safer than Hollywood…
About Hawaii and the nation turning into the Wild Wild West.
Post by: Brystont1 on November 06, 2021, 10:56:33 AM
Where did I say there is a middle ground? The Constitution protects the rights of of the people AND the rights of the individual states. If the state decides to restrict WHERE you can exercise a right, as long as that restriction doesn't make it impossible for you to exercise your individual rights, your rights are intact.
If you want to be an absolutist when talking individual rights, I can handle that. I like when rules are short, simple and completely understandable. The issue is, the Constitution creates a framework, not a user's manual. Some of the components are in direct opposition and must maintain a balance. The needs of the many vs. the needs of the few is not just a Star Trek meme.
I get where you're coming from, and that pendulum that swung toward gun control since the 1930s is now swinging the other way. But that arc isn't going to happen instantaneously. It took 90 years for it to swing to the current apex. It's going to take time and effort to see that it's allowed to continue on this new arc toward the kind of America we want as it relates to firearms.
We all seem to want the same thing -- less violence. We just have to convince the other side that trying to make everyone helpless isn't going to make anyone harmless.
At first glance I totally disagreed with this post. But as a read it more and more I think I understand what your trying to say. I am definitely an absolutist at this point, as I think most hardcore constitutionalist at this point are. The whole give an inch and they take a mile. Continuing to say that constitutional rights can be “limited” just gives them UNLIMITED justification to continue chipping at our rights.
I think a simple solution is the state needs to stay out of anything that is public property and it should be left up to the various business to decide if they’ll allow CCW. If Cheesecake Factory wants to allow people to walk in with guns it should be no business state or federal. That seems pretty simple and clear to me.
Post by: 6716J on November 06, 2021, 11:19:27 AM
Leaving Hawaii out of the mix, the Vegas guy with a CCW permit goes over to Barstow to pick up a car and carries, how would that scenario unfold if the gun is noticed when he stops for food at the McDonalds? Same for PA to NJ. Just musings looking for possible endings. Hopefully happy ones.
Post by: hvybarrels on November 06, 2021, 11:26:13 AM
At first glance I totally disagreed with this post. But as a read it more and more I think I understand what your trying to say. I am definitely an absolutist at this point, as I think most hardcore constitutionalist at this point are. The whole give an inch and they take a mile. Continuing to say that constitutional rights can be “limited” just gives them UNLIMITED justification to continue chipping at our rights.
I think a simple solution is the state needs to stay out of anything that is public property and it should be left up to the various business to decide if they’ll allow CCW. If Cheesecake Factory wants to allow people to walk in with guns it should be no business state or federal. That seems pretty simple and clear to me.
ACB used Times Square during New Year as an example, and unless I am mistaken that is a public space. If the businesses there want to ban guns then that is their prerogative, but declaring the entire area a gun free zone during certain times of the year is a clear infringement that jeopardizes public safety and goes against the intent of 2a.
Post by: omnigun on November 06, 2021, 11:47:47 AM
Post by: QUIETShooter on November 06, 2021, 11:59:15 AM
Post by: hvybarrels on November 06, 2021, 12:15:17 PM
Looks like baby steps are in order, but at least it's going in the right direction.....
When it's time to go, go all the way.
The people who keep telling us to "be reasonable" are not our friends.
Post by: drck1000 on November 06, 2021, 12:20:03 PM
When it's time to go, go all the way.Cobra Kai!
The people who keep telling us to "be reasonable" are not our friends.
Post by: macsak on November 06, 2021, 12:28:09 PM
Cobra Kai!
sweep the leg!
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 06, 2021, 12:51:42 PM
I think this place in Mililani Town Center is already preparing for it. I walked past this place (I think it was an insurance office or something) and there was this prominent sign on the door for all to see:
NO WEAPONS, FIREARMS, OR EXPLOSIVES ALLOWED ON PREMISES
;D
So funny. I had a good laugh. I guess this business will close up soon since no one here does anything illegal.
If it was an insurance office, you have to appreciate the irony! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
It's funny how the Left loves to say that "Prayers won't stop gun violence," but somehow they totally believe a sign will. :wacko:
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 06, 2021, 01:19:42 PM
When it's time to go, go all the way.
The people who keep telling us to "be reasonable" are not our friends.
You can't force a state like Hawaii to "go all the way" toward Constitutional Carry with no limits on when and where you can carry anytime in the foreseeable future.
Hawaii did not "grow up" in the same environment as the other states where a firearm meant the difference between life & death, freedom & oppression, or victim & protector.
It's difficult to get an island state to embrace the gun culture when they've never lived within that culture and the benefits it brings.
It's going to be a gradual process. I see anti-gun politicians talking, and it's as if they could just as easily be talking about rabies. They have this isolationist view that being an island gives them greater control over their lives. Hard to break that mentality.
We have no choice. It'll have to be a gradual approach. Forcing people to change their culture is not a quick or easy undertaking. There may be a ton of gun owners here, but we have to contend with the others who are opposed to public firearm ownership in any capacity.
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 06, 2021, 03:23:32 PM
You can't force a state like Hawaii to "go all the way" toward Constitutional Carry with no limits on when and where you can carry anytime in the foreseeable future.Look what they did with tazers that are covered under the 2a. It wasnt until someone sued when they decided to change the law (roberts vs. Ballard).
Hawaii did not "grow up" in the same environment as the other states where a firearm meant the difference between life & death, freedom & oppression, or victim & protector.
It's difficult to get an island state to embrace the gun culture when they've never lived within that culture and the benefits it brings.
It's going to be a gradual process. I see anti-gun politicians talking, and it's as if they could just as easily be talking about rabies. They have this isolationist view that being an island gives them greater control over their lives. Hard to break that mentality.
We have no choice. It'll have to be a gradual approach. Forcing people to change their culture is not a quick or easy undertaking. There may be a ton of gun owners here, but we have to contend with the others who are opposed to public firearm ownership in any capacity.
Then the OG bill was 50 pages. We got it trimmed to 15 pages, but HI made the seller have to jump thru hoops. So semi defacto ban. Which is why u wont be able to order a tazer on amazon or other online venues, unless they jump thru the hoops (which they wont).
Then when asked if a tazer is a deadly or dangerous weapon, the assistant AG said that is not the intent of the bill. Alan Beck (atty for Roberts) is working on getting clarification. The zoom hearing is on YT where she states this.
So HI is doing this with tazers, expect worst for open carry.
Luckily gut and replace is gone so they cannot simply add in training requirements for purchasers or registration, or buying out of state when traveling. HPD said with covid, reg is not a good idea. What about when covid is gone or reduced?
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Post by: DEROS on November 07, 2021, 10:44:45 AM
You can't force a state like Hawaii to "go all the way" toward Constitutional Carry with no limits on when and where you can carry anytime in the foreseeable future.
Hawaii did not "grow up" in the same environment as the other states where a firearm meant the difference between life & death, freedom & oppression, or victim & protector.
It's difficult to get an island state to embrace the gun culture when they've never lived within that culture and the benefits it brings.
It's going to be a gradual process. I see anti-gun politicians talking, and it's as if they could just as easily be talking about rabies. They have this isolationist view that being an island gives them greater control over their lives. Hard to break that mentality.
We have no choice. It'll have to be a gradual approach. Forcing people to change their culture is not a quick or easy undertaking. There may be a ton of gun owners here, but we have to contend with the others who are opposed to public firearm ownership in any capacity.
Hawaii will not have a choice once SCOTUS makes a ruling. If SCOTUS makes carry conceal a constitutional right, i.e. make it a shall issue, then Hawaii will need to issue permits unless they have just cause to deprive a person of their constitutional rights.
In reality, it will be very bumpy for gun owners and the government. Anti 2A will call the police because "they think" they see a gun which should be concealed. (This is one reason why I believe the law should be Open Carry with an option to carry conceal). Since the gun owner broke the condition of carry conceal, they then become a felon, losing all their rights to own a gun. Bottom-line: Hawaii and other states will make the it very expensive on the gun owner to Carry (conceal or open). Also, Hawaii will push the boundaries of sensitive areas. Just the mask mandate, they will put things like gatherings of 25 or more people outside, areas that may have minors under the age of 18 (parks, beaches, b-day parties, etc). It will be all contested but it will be yet another expensive battle and other 10 years before SCOTUS will need to re-opine 2A.
What I am concerned about is what issues that the justices opinion will address. i.e. 1. What test to apply? (This is very important. If they opine that Time, Text, and Tradition is the test, it will cause 100's of 2A cases to be re-herd, tailored to only carry conceal or carry in general. If they don't address the test, then all the rulings stay put and most likely any appeal to SCOTUS will be denied. Also, the Justice question that tradition was open carry and not concealed. So it is possible for them to opine that Open Carry is constitutional and not carry concealed. I am not sure if SCOTUS could or would do this since it was not part of the compliant or redress), 2. the limits that the state can impose (sensitive areas), 3. could the state charge ($) to exercise a right (this is really important because it cross over all the amendments. Just image if states can charge people to exercise their 1A right to free speech. I not talking having to pay security detail or renting a space, I am talking about getting a permit just to talk. Just image if the state said before you can exercise your 1A, you must get a certificate that you have taken debate or public speaking course, that you are a subject matter expert on the subject, and take a test to show proficiency prior to getting a permit to speak. By the way, to make sure that your speech is not "hate speech" we need you to apply for a permit which includes the certificates mention prior, submit the speech (i.e. like a serial number), a background check to ensure that you are not a terrorist and in 14 days you can pick up your permit. However if you don't pick up your permit within 5 days of issue, then you have to resubmit. Then after you give your speech, you have to return to certify and provide a video tape of the speech to ensure that there was no alteration of the speech that was submitted during the permitting process.
Anyway I ranting.... Hawaii and the public will just get a rude awaking when people start carrying.
Post by: DEROS on November 07, 2021, 11:06:28 AM
I think this place in Mililani Town Center is already preparing for it. I walked past this place (I think it was an insurance office or something) and there was this prominent sign on the door for all to see:
NO WEAPONS, FIREARMS, OR EXPLOSIVES ALLOWED ON PREMISES
;D
So funny. I had a good laugh. I guess this business will close up soon since no one here does anything illegal.
If you are carrying concealed and the gun is well hidden, how would they know unless they use a metal detector or you allow them to pat down. Also, what could the premise do other than to ask you to leave. As long as there is no criminal action that the store can imposed, then I don't care about the sign.
If allowed, my carry conceal will not be a large 5" bull barrel 45 which would hard as heck to hide (Hey cowboy, is that gun under your shirt or you just happy to be in this store). Other than looks, I probably wouldn't want to open carry a full size gun for any significant time (Carrying a Berretta 9mm was a PIA, especially when you also carried a long barrel) . I would most likely buy a 3" Hellcat Micro 9mm, H&K 3" P30SK 9mm or a S&W 3" M&P Shield 40cal.
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 07, 2021, 11:13:04 AM
If you are carrying concealed and the gun is well hidden, how would they know unless they use a metal detector or you allow them to pat down. Also, what could the premise do other than to ask you to leave. As long as there is no criminal action that the store can imposed, then I don't care about the sign.We will have to see if the sign has the weight of the law behind it. In nevada it does not, even in casinos. They can ask u to check ur gun or leave if u refuse.
If allowed, my carry conceal will not be a large 5" bull barrel 45 which would hard as heck to hide (Hey cowboy, is that gun under your shirt or you just happy to be in this store). Other than looks, I probably wouldn't want to open carry a full size gun for any significant time (Carrying a Berretta 9mm was a PIA, especially when you also carried a long barrel) . I would most likely buy a 3" Hellcat Micro 9mm, H&K 3" P30SK 9mm or a S&W 3" M&P Shield 40cal.
Due to HIs anti 2a attitude, im gonna say our law makers will try.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Post by: DocMercy on November 07, 2021, 01:33:35 PM
We will have to see if the sign has the weight of the law behind it. In nevada it does not, even in casinos. They can ask u to check ur gun or leave if u refuse.
I have not been to any casinos lately, so how do they know if a person is carrying a concealed weapon? Metal detector at the door? It would probably go off hundreds of times in a day. Hawaii is almost guaranteed to put something in the law about businesses being allowed to ban guns on their premises. We can be sure Whole Foods will have a big notice in their front entrance. So will every bank in the state. The legislature will also sneak in language about slapping individuals with a misdemeanor should they carry a gun into a store that bans them. Even if the person unknowingly brings a loaded gun into the store. Another requirement that the state will impose upon CCW owners is that they maintain the weapon in close control. How do they expect a carrier to go to a bathroom inside a private business, where most companies will ban guns in these locations? How hospitable will the LGS stores be to having customers carry concealed weapons loaded with ammunition? Invariably, when you travel to a store or business, you will probably need to find a place to park. How will the Aloha Tower Marketplace parking lot owners feel about gun owners carrying loaded weapons on their person as they get out of their cars and head to the sidewalk? Thus, there are a lot of practicalities that need to be figured out before we enter CCW heaven.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 07, 2021, 03:23:10 PM
I have not been to any casinos lately, so how do they know if a person is carrying a concealed weapon? Metal detector at the door? It would probably go off hundreds of times in a day. Hawaii is almost guaranteed to put something in the law about businesses being allowed to ban guns on their premises. We can be sure Whole Foods will have a big notice in their front entrance. So will every bank in the state. The legislature will also sneak in language about slapping individuals with a misdemeanor should they carry a gun into a store that bans them. Even if the person unknowingly brings a loaded gun into the store. Another requirement that the state will impose upon CCW owners is that they maintain the weapon in close control. How do they expect a carrier to go to a bathroom inside a private business, where most companies will ban guns in these locations? How hospitable will the LGS stores be to having customers carry concealed weapons loaded with ammunition? Invariably, when you travel to a store or business, you will probably need to find a place to park. How will the Aloha Tower Marketplace parking lot owners feel about gun owners carrying loaded weapons on their person as they get out of their cars and head to the sidewalk? Thus, there are a lot of practicalities that need to be figured out before we enter CCW heaven.
CASINO QUESTION:
Some casinos have detectors at the main entrances. However, last time I stayed at Main Street Station, there were only notices on the doors that barred firearms in the casino. That was a few years ago. I read that the Cosmopolitan has installed metal detectors and screens all guests. Most properties don't advertise their security measures so as not to freely give information to anyone interested in finding an easy target.
I stored my firearms in my room at Main Street. That's not the casino, so I took the signs literally.
Casinos would need to set up a manned screening entrance like the courthouses or airports to wand and X-ray everyone and everything. I don't think that's the "experience" they want tourists to have to suffer through. However, with the COVID screening (questions and temp checks), it's easier to merge that with security screening and reduce the inconvenience of only doing security screens.
If you happen to print, expose or otherwise give away the fact you're carrying, you could be barred from the casino's properties -- and that means ALL of their properties. Most major casinos are part of a much larger corporation, so that might cause a real problem for you.
I think if you want to carry, and the casino posts signs against, you should either disarm or go elsewhere -- your choice. Breaking the rules brings consequences.
https://www.yogonet.com/international/noticias/2020/10/13/55036-las-vegas-casinos-strengthening-security-measures-amid-increased-violence-on-the-strip
HAWAII LAWS:
If you "unknowingly" carry a loaded firearm anywhere, you probably do need to receive a wake-up call. I can't imagine anyone not knowing they have a concealed weapon, especially if they carry it everyday. If you meant they carried into a store they didn't know prohibits it, that's different. You can simply leave when asked. Better than having the police called and getting a trespass notice.
As for keeping the weapon "close", the existing Hawaii statutes merely state that you need to be within close proximity of the firearm so that it is within your control. On a table, on a hook, etc. Basically at an arms distance within reach. How you implement the requirement is up to you. Holsters and clothing will vary. Maybe in some cases, a shoulder rig makes the most sense if you need to visit Johnny very often.
Gun stores on the mainland vary by how lenient they are. I know one that asked each person to unload their CCW weapon in their car and present it to the greeter with the action open to show it's safe. Lots of customers are there to try out holsters, and they don't need people handling loaded pistols while inserting and removing them inside holsters, One particular store places a zip tie through the mag well to ensure you can't insert a mag.
Most of the time, it would be smart and prudent to unload your pistol and use a case to carry it into a gun store if you need to show it to the staff. If they allow CCW on premises, maybe carry another pistol loaded in your holster? Any time you remove a pistol from a holster, you're inviting Mr. Murphy to make your day a bad one.
https://youtu.be/agL59nLBAqk
PARKING LOTS:
Most businesses can't enforce bans on firearms in parking lots, loaded or not, because they have to allow patrons the ability to disarm and store their weapons in their vehicles if they expect anyone who carries to shop there. In fact, employees have won court cases against their employers who tried to prohibit guns from employee parking lots. That becomes a defacto infringement on the employees' right to be armed as they commute to and from work.
Common sense has to be part of the equation. Trying to disarm the public by making it a game of hopscotch won't fly. If you can carry to work, but not at work, the business must allow firearms in their parking lots. If you have to use public parking, your choices may be limited. Make sure the businesses running public parking lots get the message, too. They are losing business with their policies.
Every time I see these types of discussions, I think back to the Luby's Cafeteria mass shooting in Texas. The legislature recently banned carrying firearms in restaurants. One lady lost both her parents, even though she had a good chance to defend them and herself if she hadn't obeyed the law by leaving her gun in the car. These are teachable moments that should be used everywhere the government seeks to control CCW.
https://youtu.be/FvTO-y-B2YM
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 07, 2021, 03:29:54 PM
We went to vegas a month or so after the vegas shooting. Only wynn was adding new measures at the doors. Which was a bag check. I walked right in and even past multiple k9s. They probably profile and im not wearing anything "tactical" looking like 5.11 pants, american flag type shirts on the sleeve, etc...
Only place that had metal detectors was the arena to see the backstreet boys at the miracle mile. I checked my gun with planet hollywood and got it back after. No biggje.
Even after getting my gun back, we gambled at PH and no one stopped me. Which means they werent watching to make sure we left.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Post by: Inspector on November 09, 2021, 02:24:06 AM
https://www.ammoland.com/2021/11/pros-and-cons-of-two-likely-outcomes-from-nysrpa-v-bruen/
Interesting article
Post by: omnigun on November 09, 2021, 07:14:04 AM
Post by: aieahound on November 09, 2021, 01:10:34 PM
Pros and Cons of Two Likely Outcomes From NYSRPA v. Bruen
https://www.ammoland.com/2021/11/pros-and-cons-of-two-likely-outcomes-from-nysrpa-v-bruen/
Interesting article
Good article.
I’m thinking it’s going to be a landmark decision but narrow in its scope.
It will only focus on the issue at hand. The Right to carry with no special need.
But will not limit the restrictions on the States to regulate requirements.
And up the ladder firearm owners will have to climb again.
Post by: Inspector on November 09, 2021, 01:19:30 PM
Good article.I posted it because I thought it was a good article as well. I thought both points were valid.
I’m thinking it’s going to be a landmark decision but narrow in its scope.
It will only focus on the issue at hand. The Right to carry with no special need.
But will not limit the restrictions on the States to regulate requirements.
And up the ladder firearm owners will have to climb again.
I agree unfortunately. I think the decision is going to be a very narrow ruling and will probably leave some open for interpretation. Meaning we may need another case with another decision with a more broad ruling. But we’ll see how it plays out. I could certainly be wrong. And I hope I am.
Post by: hvybarrels on November 09, 2021, 01:28:53 PM
Post by: RSN172 on November 09, 2021, 07:00:24 PM