2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: pacwire on June 23, 2022, 04:53:26 AM
-
Just Announced!!!!!!
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/new-york-gun-law-supreme-court-decision/index.html
Aloha!
:shaka:
-
BREAKING: Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN New York concealed carry restrictions
https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-supreme-court-strikes-down-new-york-concealed-carry-restrictions/(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220623/e75a8c6b574dd7ffedef95a764e22ecf.gif)
Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk
-
Don't light your cigars yet, the state still has plenty of fuckery up its sleeve and hates to lose. This is haowever a big win . Thank You to all the people that have sacrificed their time/money to get this far!
-
LOL! This will be the darling of the News for days to come...... ;D
-
Karl Rhoads and Chris Lee brains are working triple time to come up with something to circumvent this ruling. Clarence Thomas, who wrote the decision, said it is a constitutional right as much as the first is. There are calls for an emergency session of Congress to circumvent this ruling as well. My question is, "How can you make laws to circumvent what the SCOTUS has said is a constitutional right?"
-
Link to the 135 page opinion
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
-
They gonna bring back appointment only and gonna be waiting 6 months to get a permit lol
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
https://www.facebook.com/TheHDF/photos/a.247449455300124/5773223786055969/ (https://www.facebook.com/TheHDF/photos/a.247449455300124/5773223786055969/)
(https://www.facebook.com/TheHDF/photos/a.247449455300124/5773223786055969/)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/B6PUqi2.jpg)
Murphy's Bar and Grill
https://www.murphyshawaii.com/
Thursday June 23 5pm to 8pm
-
I just finished my letter to my HPD police chief
for conceal carry per 134-9.
I also mention 18 US Code section 242.
It goes in the mail tomorrow.
SCOTUS just gave us a hammer to slam them with.
:thumbsup:
.
-
Karl Rhoads and Chris Lee brains are working triple time to come up with something to circumvent this ruling. Clarence Thomas, who wrote the decision, said it is a constitutional right as much as the first is. There are calls for an emergency session of Congress to circumvent this ruling as well. My question is, "How can you make laws to circumvent what the SCOTUS has said is a constitutional right?"
Everytown has already stated they are doing this.
-
I just finished my letter to my HPD police chief
for conceal carry per 134-9.
I also mention 18 US Code section 242.
It goes in the mail tomorrow.
SCOTUS just gave us a hammer to slam them with.
:thumbsup:
.
Please let me know how it goes. We're very interested in what happens with applications on the Big Island.
-
Karl Rhoads and Chris Lee brains are working triple time to come up with something to circumvent this ruling. Clarence Thomas, who wrote the decision, said it is a constitutional right as much as the first is. There are calls for an emergency session of Congress to circumvent this ruling as well. My question is, "How can you make laws to circumvent what the SCOTUS has said is a constitutional right?"
Congress passes unconstitutional laws all the time. It takes a judicial review by the courts, possibly as high as the Supreme Court, to issue an injunction against them.
Lawyers playing lawyer games and getting richer from our taxes.
The ACA was knowingly unconstitutional because the "fee" for people opting out of insurance was unconstitutional. Even though the bill was sold using a "fee" or "fines" and NOT calling it a tax, when asked by the Supreme Court to explain why they had the power to levy such fines, the lawyers for the administration changed it to a tax.
Unconstitutional laws don't exist unless a court says they are unconstitutional, no matter how blatantly they violate our rights.
-
Another thing HI can (and likely will) do to throw a wrench in the works is CCW Reciprocity among other states.
States have the right to honor/reject CCW licenses/permits from other states. HI presently declines to honor out of state CCW permits, so I doubt that will change. What will happen is all other states may not honor a HI CCW permit when you travel there simply because reciprocity means just that: They'll honor your state's permits if HI honors their's.
However, if you want to apply for another state's non-resident permit, you may be required to first obtain a HI permit. Utah requires that you have a permit from your home state before they will issue you a non-resident permit there. Right now, Utah recognizes HI is a defacto "will never issue" state, so they waive that requirement for us. I can see that provision changing.
-
+1 for ccw. Now suppressors next please! At least for rifles anyway.
-
Leftists are predictably melting down!
https://youtu.be/gn5r5ybVieM
-
At the end of the video I posted from FOXNews The Five, Dana says when the Supreme Court publishes their opinion on the Dobbs case (Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization), the same people screaming against this gun rights decision will be arguing the exact opposite.
Specifically, she meant that the SCOTUS ruling today affirmed that the states do not have the power to override the US Constitution and the Second & Fourteenth Amendments. In Dobbs, the leaked SCOTUS opinion paper is saying the states DO have the right/power to decide on abortion laws for themselves since abortion is not a right recognized by the Constitution.
She's right. These people can not be any more hypocritical in their agendas.
-
Thank you to all those who have worked so hard for our rights! HiFiCo and all the other gun rights groups.
Don’t forget to make a donation! 🤙🏽
-
https://youtu.be/jFN51ZMIg3E
-
2nd Amendment is NOT a Second Class "RIGHT"! We the People should not need to prove the need to exercise that RIGHT!!
-
2nd Amendment is NOT a Second Class "RIGHT"! We the People should not need to prove the need to exercise that RIGHT!!
Since when have Hawaiian Democrats or Republicans for that matter
given a shit about your "rights"?
I hope every body here applies for a concealed carry permit tomorrow.
And contacts their police commissions if there is not a quick response.
:grrr:
-
The man came through for us and the Constitiution.
-
I just finished my letter to my HPD police chief
for conceal carry per 134-9.
I also mention 18 US Code section 242.
It goes in the mail tomorrow.
SCOTUS just gave us a hammer to slam them with.
:thumbsup:
.
I believe there needs to be an organized day when a large group submits a Carry Conceal request to HPD. When HPD denies, then the group files for a suit. HPD or the State of Hawaii doesn't need to change anything until someone legally challenges the procedure.
-
It begins
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/06/24/following-high-courts-decision-gun-owners-line-up-outside-hpd-permits-carry-weapons/ (https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/06/24/following-high-courts-decision-gun-owners-line-up-outside-hpd-permits-carry-weapons/)
-
It begins
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/06/24/following-high-courts-decision-gun-owners-line-up-outside-hpd-permits-carry-weapons/ (https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/06/24/following-high-courts-decision-gun-owners-line-up-outside-hpd-permits-carry-weapons/)
Last line in the article:
“Unfortunately, you know, it’s like, the status quo has served us very well. And I’m afraid in this respect, we’re going to become more like continental states where murder gun murder rates are higher.”
-
The man came through for us and the Constitiution.
The one you really need to thank is Donald Trump.
-
It begins
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/06/24/following-high-courts-decision-gun-owners-line-up-outside-hpd-permits-carry-weapons/ (https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/06/24/following-high-courts-decision-gun-owners-line-up-outside-hpd-permits-carry-weapons/)
good thing I took care of my business at HPD already. I can imagine the wait in the line now
-
https://www.honolulupd.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/LTC2018Application.pdf
-
Cope harder Mrs. Rhoads
-
good thing I took care of my business at HPD already. I can imagine the wait in the line now
And I'll bet they (HPD) will take their damn time.
-
good thing I took care of my business at HPD already. I can imagine the wait in the line now
I'm on the BI, so don't know how it is here, but I'm in no rush. What I wonder about is if the permits will be county specific rather than statewide. Knowing the pricks in government, I am sure they will make it county specific.
-
So do we still need to fill out a reason on the form why we wanna carry?
-
https://www.honolulupd.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/LTC2018Application.pdf
"Provide handwritten or typed reasons for License to Carry Concealed"
Cuz SCOTUS confirmed it was my right.
-
I think we still need to wait until the Hawaii ruling is done, then Hawaii needs to set up a system to which they will approve ccw permits
until that happens the ccw permits will be the same
but I'm not a lawyer, so don't quote me
-
I think we still need to wait until the Hawaii ruling is done, then Hawaii needs to set up a system to which they will approve ccw permits
until that happens the ccw permits will be the same
but I'm not a lawyer, so don't quote me
^^^This, Or if the chief was good, he could just approve all and site the ruling.
So if he still denies them, then we know he is not following the ruling and thus enforcing unconstitutional laws since he has the sole discretion. Which means he will support and act on other unconstitutional laws.
If he states he needs to wait for the law to change, is not a reason. Again, he has the sole discretion to approve or deny since it already states "may issue".
-
I'm on the BI, so don't know how it is here, but I'm in no rush. What I wonder about is if the permits will be county specific rather than statewide. Knowing the pricks in government, I am sure they will make it county specific.
Wouldn't surprise me at all. I also wouldn't be surprised "they" are in a huddle right now, figuring out the hardest, most frustrating, and ridiculous laws they can attach to this new SCOTUS ruling so they can maintain their "status quo" as Rhoades so lovingly lamented.
-
So do we still need to fill out a reason on the form why we wanna carry?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
-
Check out Tulsi's IG post. She informally asked a high level HPD officer if she would be approved for CCW. She was told no. She stated that she was able to get security protection until the guy who threatened to cut her head off was caught. She mentions that others are not as lucky, which is why the SCOTUS ruling is important.
I do like Tulsi, but 1 thing I don't like is she signed on for the AWB annual DC ban bill.
-
So do we still need to fill out a reason on the form why we wanna carry?
I just put "pursuant to US Second Amendment and Article 1 Section 17 of The Constitution of the State of Hawaii."
I'm hoping that it's just as easy as dropping off the thing at HPD.
-
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Don't forget to include the 14th Amendment, too.
"Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State's licensing regime violates the Constitution."
"We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to carry a hand- gun for self-defense outside the home."
--Justice Clarence Thomas
-
I just put "pursuant to US Second Amendment and Article 1 Section 17 of The Constitution of the State of Hawaii."
I'm hoping that it's just as easy as dropping off the thing at HPD.
Yup, simple as just drop it off.
I've done it many times. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Don't forget to include the 14th Amendment, too.
"Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State's licensing regime violates the Constitution."
"We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to carry a hand- gun for self-defense outside the home."
--Justice Clarence Thomas
???
Since when are arms only hand guns ?
(#IRant4drk1K)
-
???
Since when are arms only hand guns ?
(#IRant4drk1K)
The ruling yesterday was about concealed carry. So, the ruling and opinions are specific to handguns.
Supreme Court strikes down New York's handgun law
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/new-york-gun-law-supreme-court-decision/index.html
-
https://youtu.be/jwJmxIKVvIw
-
Justice Alito basically applied the exact same logic almost everyone on this forum has posted ad nauseam with regards to the notion that somehow restricting law abiding citizens from carrying for self defense will magically stop a psychopath, career criminal or gang member from using guns illegally. He also points out how the anti-gunners love to cite the 60K gun deaths stat when making arguments, but they fail to explain how their agenda will reduce the number of suicides which comprise 60% of that gun-death total.
Reading his opinion points was like reading the logical points made on here. The best point was how he said that laws do not deter crime (something one forum member refuses to believe). The NY law that restricts concealed carry did not stop the Buffalo Market mass shooting. Nor did it stop the ever rising number of gun related crimes New York is experiencing. Believing gun laws stop crimes from happening is naive and unsupported by history.
This article and Alito's remarks are well worth the read.
Alito Takes a Blow Torch to Liberal Justices' Dissent
The arguments made by the dissenting justices were wildly irrelevant from the issue of
constitutionality and current law, prompting Justice Samuel Alito to file a separate,
concurring opinion destroying their claims. He also took issue with their ignorance and
arrogance surrounding the facts of lawful gun ownership vs. criminality.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2022/06/23/alito-takes-a-blow-torch-to-liberal-justices-opinion-on-latest-gun-case-n2609218
-
Just wondering to those who turned in their license to carry paperwork, what did you put for the "reason"?
-
Yup, simple as just drop it off.
I've done it many times. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
You bein serious? The rofl emoji suggests so. Guess i have to find out myself.
-
You bein serious? The rofl emoji suggests so. Guess i have to find out myself.
I think he's laughing because he should not have had to apply "many times." Once should have been enough had the law not given police chiefs the power to deny them for no valid reason.
If you actually get approval, you'll then have to satisfy the requirements, like proof of training, background check, fingerprinting, etc.
Few have ever made it that far, so don't be surprised if HPD isn't able to complete the application process and issue a license anytime soon.
-
Just wondering to those who turned in their license to carry paperwork, what did you put for the "reason"?
I did apply several years ago
when I asked the cop behind the glass for a ccw application, his reply was, "why you going apply for. you know you going get denied anyways."
so I doubt it ever gets to the chief at all. they just print out the generic denial letter, stamp the cheif's signature, and presto......they checked the boxes and you are officially denied
it's common knowledge that no common citizen gets approved for ccw, no matter what the reason is
on the news yesterday they said in the past 24 years, 4 people have been approved for ccw. who these people are is a mystery. maybe its some politician or their wife, or somebody that knows somebody. but its nobody that we know
-
I was looking at the application. https://www.honolulupd.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/LTC2018Application.pdf
Instead of writing out reasons you may fear injury to your person or property, could you just staple the full SCOTUS brief to the application?
Wonder what they would say to a 3 foot pile of applications.
AD, is there a short form if you renew? I dont suppose that has been an issue yet. One year seems to be short at best.
-
I did apply several years ago
when I asked the cop behind the glass for a ccw application, his reply was, "why you going apply for. you know you going get denied anyways."
so I doubt it ever gets to the chief at all. they just print out the generic denial letter, stamp the cheif's signature, and presto......they checked the boxes and you are officially denied
it's common knowledge that no common citizen gets approved for ccw, no matter what the reason is
on the news yesterday they said in the past 24 years, 4 people have been approved for ccw. who these people are is a mystery. maybe its some politician or their wife, or somebody that knows somebody. but its nobody that we know
Based on the text of the SCOTUS ruling, the correct response to "Justification" or "Reason" should be:
N/A
-
Currently the requirements ARE:
(1) Be qualified to use the firearm in a safe manner;
(2) Appear to be a suitable person to be so licensed;
(3) Not be prohibited under section 134-7 from the ownership or possession of a firearm; and
(4) Not have been adjudged insane or not appear to be mentally deranged.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol03_Ch0121-0200D/HRS0134/HRS_0134-0009.htm (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol03_Ch0121-0200D/HRS0134/HRS_0134-0009.htm)
Im thinking, once the Hawaii case is resolved, they will have to issue permits on a "shall issue" basis, until our legislature has time to pass more onerous and stringent requirements and fees. (which you KNOW they are scrambling to do right now)
Reason being, if you are legally able to acquire a handgun, you are already eligible to be issued a carry license.
(of course , my opinion and IANAL)
-
CA AG issues no longer requires good cause. Efd immediately.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
CA AG issues no longer requires good cause. Efd immediately.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Wow, CA concedes? Amazing.....
-
Some good news. I am glad firearm rights overall are being recognized.
-
You bein serious? The rofl emoji suggests so. Guess i have to find out myself.
Unfortunately, I was serious.
Used to apply after every additional training course just to add to the list.
Though I may have taken more classes the past couple of years, I haven't (re-)applied for Hawaii CCW.
I became a Utah CFP Instructor so they could carry in all of Utah's reciprocity states and get some folks that cert in the event it became a requirement for when Hawaii did legalize CCW.
Knew it would happen sooner or later but this is earlier than I expected ! :o
-
Not really. Most rational people aren't one issue voters.
Leftists are not rational.
Liberalism is a mentai illness.
Violence as a response to a Supreme Court ruling is a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER to this Democracy. The Judiciary is not supposed to bend to the will of ANY group. They apply the Constitution and existing law. Roe v Wade was bad law when it was decided in 1973. The Left has pushed the envelope well beyond "safe, legal and rare." The decision is just the pendulum swinging back toward "rational."
https://youtu.be/GJJPc6Y4C7s
https://youtu.be/lj_lmy2rJVA
https://youtu.be/Cqe8oUhJhdk
-
All
Im just going to "wait". Im wondering if the process is "not really worked out for HPD".
or
They really "wont" do anything till the State AG tells um "please accept." Untill then, still deny?
Im kind of curious if they will allow all who have "out of state" CCW to accept those.
I have a feeling they will "make up" their rules for us all to "jump" thru.
Oh boy! Here we go...
Have a GREAT DAY!
-
Im kind of curious if they will allow all who have "out of state" CCW to accept those.
There is no way Hawaii will accept any out of state permits. What they will do is make it as difficult as possible to obtain one. I was not 100% thrilled with the decision written by Clarence Thomas. I was hoping for national constitutional carry or at the very least, national reciprocity where even a non resident out of state permit must be honored. I would guess there are at least a few thousand of us already holding those.
-
There could be a slim chance of reciprocity with some states with higher training requirements, only because of the time and resources needed by the police. I estimate in Honolulu there would be 80 to 160 requests for CCW per day which the police wouldn't be able to process.
But reciprocity would need to be passed in a law and go through Karl Rhoads. So not counting on it.
-
There could be a slim chance of reciprocity with some states with higher training requirements, only because of the time and resources needed by the police. I estimate in Honolulu there would be 80 to 160 requests for CCW per day which the police wouldn't be able to process.
But reciprocity would need to be passed in a law and go through Karl Rhoads. So not counting on it.
National Reciprocity would likewise need to be passed through the US Congress and signed into law, just like driver's licenses and marriage licenses are treted now. If you have a Hawaii license, you're allowed to legally operate an automobile in any state in the country. No need to consult a map to see which states you can legally drive through.
If the Courts recognize the right to carry is in the US Constitution, then there should be a push to pass national reciprocity for that reason alone.
Strike while the iron is hot. :thumbsup:
-
National reciprocity is possible if we retake the presidency and gain a super majority in congress in 2024. It's a real possibility.
But for constitutionalists, it's a problem since national reciprocity is based on the interstate commerce clause, a bad precedent that led to an overpowered Federal government. The best way is to have SCOTUS rule for constitutional carry, possible since I don't think there were carry permits when the constitution was written.
-
National Reciprocity would likewise need to be passed through the US Congress and signed into law, just like driver's licenses and marriage licenses are treted now. If you have a Hawaii license, you're allowed to legally operate an automobile in any state in the country. No need to consult a map to see which states you can legally drive through.
If the Courts recognizes the right to carry is in the US Constitution, then there should be a push to pass national reciprocity for that reason alone.
Strike while the iron is hot. :thumbsup:
"then there should be a push to pass national reciprocity "
I think it was called the "Hudson" bill in 2017- 2018?
The useless Republicans controlling both the house and Senate didn't bother
to consider it.
Even with a president that would have signed it.
I don't always bitch about Democrats.
:wtf:
-
National reciprocity may happen sooner than we think. Thomas made a clear point about the violation of the 14th Amendment in the opinion.
Last sentence of the opinion.
"New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public."
-
"then there should be a push to pass national reciprocity "
I think it was called the "Hudson" bill in 2017- 2018?
The useless Republicans controlling both the house and Senate didn't bother
to consider it.
Even with a president that would have signed it.
I don't always bitch about Democrats.
:wtf:
The gun media hyped it up knowing in reality it was not going to pass. It was obvious we didn't have 60 votes in the Senate to break the filibuster to pass it. 52 Republicans in the Senate at the time.
-
Morning news said Chris Lee was drafting legislation to require same amount of training as police in order to carry. Of course such training is not available to civilians as far as I know. Please correct me if I am wrong. As I said earlier, they are going to make the requirements so difficult it will still amount to a de facto ban.
-
Morning news said Chris Lee was drafting legislation to require same amount of training as police in order to carry. Of course such training is not available to civilians as far as I know. Please correct me if I am wrong. As I said earlier, they are going to make the requirements so difficult it will still amount to a de facto ban.
Or limited and use the excuse that if HPD needs to do the training, "we don't have the staffing". IDK how this would hold up in court because I don't think any other state requires training to be done by the police. HPD firearms division alone cost over $1,000,00 annually to run.
-
do they have to do training, or do they have to pass a test?
-
So here's some take away,
HI law requires an "exceptional circumstance" which SCOTUS struck down.
The 2nd thing HI law requires is "good moral character", which SCOUTS said any requirements must be objective. GMC is subjective.
Another is that SCOTUS ruled and cited historical stuff as the test. Not the current 2 test system that has been used for decades here. Which means other laws have a good chance of being struck down in HI.
-
do they have to do training, or do they have to pass a test?
HPD has an annual firearms test that they must complete to stay as an active officer. I know cops who only shoot once a year (for the exam) and do no training on their own. And then you have others who enjoy shooting and practice all the time on their own.
-
The gun media hyped it up knowing in reality it was not going to pass. It was obvious we didn't have 60 votes in the Senate to break the filibuster to pass it. 52 Republicans in the Senate at the time.
That is true. But forcing a roll-call vote is a good thing.
Then one can ask why is that licence recognized in one state and not another,
of the Senators that objected?
:grrr:
-
Then one can ask why is that licence recognized in one state and not another,
of the Senators that objected?
:grrr:
Because guns bad, cars good.
-
That is true. But forcing a roll-call vote is a good thing.
Then one can ask why is that licence recognized in one state and not another,
of the Senators that objected?
:grrr:
The issue then becomes, do states get to decide on their own standards for issuing permits, or will the feds create a "framework" that details the minimum required?
One example is the Motorcycle Endorsement/License. I remember passing that driving test in NC. It was super easy compared to Hawaii's.
Yet, I am able to drive a MC in Hawaii if I have a NC operator's license with a MC endorsement. :crazy:
National reciprocity should have minimum training/testing criteria for all states. If every state meets that threshold, than each state MUST honor out-of-state carry permits. -- no exceptions.
JMO
-
HPD has an annual firearms test that they must complete to stay as an active officer. I know cops who only shoot once a year (for the exam) and do no training on their own. And then you have others who enjoy shooting and practice all the time on their own.
ok. that's what I thought. I know a few cops, 1 is family. they mentioned the firearms test but not doing X amount of documented training, but enough to pass the test. IIRC, the test is not too difficult but I forget exactly what it involves
-
ok. that's what I thought. I know a few cops, 1 is family. they mentioned the firearms test but not doing X amount of documented training, but enough to pass the test. IIRC, the test is not too difficult but I forget exactly what it involves
I'm trying to get the exact requirements. This way if Sen Chris Lee wants to make it more difficult than HPD's test, then we have grounds to get the testing qualification lowered.
-
The issue then becomes, do states get to decide on their own standards for issuing permits, or will the feds create a "framework" that details the minimum required?
One example is the Motorcycle Endorsement/License. I remember passing that driving test in NC. It was super easy compared to Hawaii's.
Yet, I am able to drive a MC in Hawaii if I have a NC operator's license with a MC endorsement. :crazy:
National reciprocity should have minimum training/testing criteria for all states. If every state meets that threshold, than each state MUST honor out-of-state carry permits. -- no exceptions.
JMO
1) While I agree that everyone should train and be able to meet a minimum criteria, what is it? Who makes the standards? While not popular with a lot of people, I think State preemption should be taken away. Firearms are federally regulated through the 2nd Amendment and should stay that way. We can get a passport to travel, we can get a national open/concealed carry permit. Essentially if you are an adult, you can carry. The only thing the states should have a say in is if the carry open or concealed.
2) We are dealing with RIGHTS vs PRIVILEGES. There are no precussors to the right to vote, exercise your 1st or 5th Amendment rights. Also Thomas was explicit in his use of the violation of the 14th Amendment rights. It's the last sentence of the opinion. So I think (that being the key word) that states will have a hard time to go past minimal proficiency. Meaning if you can pass the basic marksmanship test for the local PD, you should be able to carry. They can't make it harder than what they mandate for their own PD. Does anyone know the HPD marksmanship minimums?
3) The problem will be the implementation of requirements. They can't be onerous and the fees can't be extravagant. as was stated in the SCOTUS opinion also.
So as we move forward, we can look forward to more lawsuits against the State and against the local PD as they make up new laws and their own rules (yes you HPD)
-
1) While I agree that everyone should train and be able to meet a minimum criteria, what is it? Who makes the standards? While not popular with a lot of people, I think State preemption should be taken away. Firearms are federally regulated through the 2nd Amendment and should stay that way. We can get a passport to travel, we can get a national open/concealed carry permit. Essentially if you are an adult, you can carry. The only thing the states should have a say in is if the carry open or concealed.
2) We are dealing with RIGHTS vs PRIVILEGES. There are no precussors to the right to vote, exercise your 1st or 5th Amendment rights. Also Thomas was explicit in his use of the violation of the 14th Amendment rights. It's the last sentence of the opinion. So I think (that being the key word) that states will have a hard time to go past minimal proficiency. Meaning if you can pass the basic marksmanship test for the local PD, you should be able to carry. They can't make it harder than what they mandate for their own PD. Does anyone know the HPD marksmanship minimums?
3) The problem will be the implementation of requirements. They can't be onerous and the fees can't be extravagant. as was stated in the SCOTUS opinion also.
So as we move forward, we can look forward to more lawsuits against the State and against the local PD as they make up new laws and their own rules (yes you HPD)
HPD's one will be UIPA'd.
FBI is online and above. So is the air marshal requirement. That's a tough one.
-
1) While I agree that everyone should train and be able to meet a minimum criteria, what is it? Who makes the standards? While not popular with a lot of people, I think State preemption should be taken away. Firearms are federally regulated through the 2nd Amendment and should stay that way. We can get a passport to travel, we can get a national open/concealed carry permit. Essentially if you are an adult, you can carry. The only thing the states should have a say in is if the carry open or concealed.
2) We are dealing with RIGHTS vs PRIVILEGES. There are no precussors to the right to vote, exercise your 1st or 5th Amendment rights. Also Thomas was explicit in his use of the violation of the 14th Amendment rights. It's the last sentence of the opinion. So I think (that being the key word) that states will have a hard time to go past minimal proficiency. Meaning if you can pass the basic marksmanship test for the local PD, you should be able to carry. They can't make it harder than what they mandate for their own PD. Does anyone know the HPD marksmanship minimums?
3) The problem will be the implementation of requirements. They can't be onerous and the fees can't be extravagant. as was stated in the SCOTUS opinion also.
So as we move forward, we can look forward to more lawsuits against the State and against the local PD as they make up new laws and their own rules (yes you HPD)
The minimum will have to follow existing permitting standards in the states that require them.
I think basic training and pistol operation is a must, plus local and federal laws, like transporting, brandishing, printing, etc. It's too difficult sometimes to reconcile the transportation requirements state-to-state. Should be no "gotchas" when it comes to having a firearm and traveling.
A test is separate from the training. You should be able to pass the classroom test, and then take the proficiency test within a reasonable time after. The classroom portion can be done online. Scheduling the firing test could be a problem for working gun owners, so maybe a 30-60 day window to pass it. If you fail, you can return in a day or two and retake it within the 30-60 days prescribed.
While I don't agree everyone needs to pass a test to own firearms, I think basic safety training should be required. What we have here in Hawaii with NRA training seems to be fine. You can substitute other forms like military training or hunter's ed, so I don't have an issue with that requirement.
CCW (IMHO) should require at least a minimum proficiency demonstration. Last thing you want is someone who's never fired their carry gun in their life pulling it in public -- unless they are handing it to someone else to use who trains regularly.
Responsible gun owners will take appropriate actions to be proficient. Unfortunately, not everyone fits that category, so mandatory training and testing will be the "common sense" restriction that I think most can agree on.
As I said, many states already have the standards in place. We just need a minimum version for the framework.
-
HPD's one will be UIPA'd.
FBI is online and above. So is the air marshal requirement. That's a tough one.
I found the Hawaii Police Dept General Order 810 online. The Procedures for firearm training and standards are all redacted -- about 2/3 of the order.
I guess they don't want anyone second-guessing their low-bar requirements for officers. Just guessing.
-
The minimum will have to follow existing permitting standards in the states that require them.
I think basic training and pistol operation is a must, plus local and federal laws, like transporting, brandishing, printing, etc. It's too difficult sometimes to reconcile the transportation requirements state-to-state. Should be no "gotchas" when it comes to having a firearm and traveling.
A test is separate from the training. You should be able to pass the classroom test, and then take the proficiency test within a reasonable time after. The classroom portion can be done online. Scheduling the firing test could be a problem for working gun owners, so maybe a 30-60 day window to pass it. If you fail, you can return in a day or two and retake it within the 30-60 days prescribed.
While I don't agree everyone needs to pass a test to own firearms, I think basic safety training should be required. What we have here in Hawaii with NRA training seems to be fine. You can substitute other forms like military training or hunter's ed, so I don't have an issue with that requirement.
CCW (IMHO) should require at least a minimum proficiency demonstration. Last thing you want is someone who's never fired their carry gun in their life pulling it in public -- unless they are handing it to someone else to use who trains regularly.
Responsible gun owners will take appropriate actions to be proficient. Unfortunately, not everyone fits that category, so mandatory training and testing will be the "common sense" restriction that I think most can agree on.
As I said, many states already have the standards in place. We just need a minimum version for the framework.
I definitely agree with all of this.
There should be a minimum level of training and a proficiency test to carry. I agree that the NRA pistol course should be the minimum level of training to obtain the CCW/OC permit. It's already an agreed upon national standard. I'm just playing the devils advocate when it comes to the RIGHTS of bearing arms. If we applied the same logic to voting, there would be about 50 million people not voting every time. Which I can definitely get on board with. I'd love to see mandatory in person voter registration. It's been proven you can do it when you renew your drivers license or ID every 4 years or 8 max, state dependent. But that's a different tangent...
For transportation, use, etc., again, one national standard. NJ can't have one and California can't have another. Too many ways of unknowingly breaking the law. Even firearms attorneys don't know every states laws.
And yes responsible people will be responsible. the others, not so much