Right, it gets introduced & killed in committee.  The committee decisions are made long before the public 'hearing' and vote (read dog & pony show). 

Fundamentally, it comes down to this: a choice between freedom & slavery.
Hawaii has a long history of slavery, in the form of the old Ali'i system that the state government is founded on.  Hawaii likes to think of itself as democratic, but let's face it, we have the least number of elected officials of any state in the union.  We elect the Governor and the Mayor, who appoint everyone else.  These "Ali'i" provide 'security' and 'welfare' for us commoners, as long as we give up our freedom.  Slaves may not bear arms.  There are lots & lots of people here who wish to be told what to do, every day by their 'leaders', bosses, etc and have a serious case of "don't be the nail sticking out" syndrome. 

we need to become that nail, if we are to succeed.  Just like the civil rights movement, it takes time & money.  Freedom in Hawaii, I think, will not be 'bought' in the legislature.  That would mean allowing us to be truly free, which threatens the system.  The courthouse, is IMO, the only place we can win this contest.  The law is the constitutional or not, regardless of what the legislature wants it to be.   

I've read the wording of HRS §134-9  Licenses to carry[/b][/font]  about concealed permits: "in exceptional circumstances" "when one has reason to fear for life or property" "May issue, for one year" and I have a few questions.
Are there any attorneys on this board?  Has there ever been a challenge to this law?  Has anyone successfully filed a "Sunshine Law" request for a list of all permit holders in Hawaii? 


That seems the logical approach to changing Hawaii from 'may issue' to 'shall issue'.  I'd bet that the list of permit holders is littered with blatant corruption (Friends with the Chief? Permit! Politically connected?  Permit!  Big donor?  Permit!)
If one could demonstrate that the permits are issued without 'exceptional' need to friends, etc, then one could challenge the law as being unequally applied and is disenfranchising the public.


Another way would be sue that the current 'may issue' system is an unconstitutional infringement of the 2A right to 'bear' arms.  Hawaii law allows you to 'keep' arms, but 'bearing' them (unless you're one of the Ali'i) is a Class A felony.


Thoughts?  Comments?

I read this article, written by Massad Ayoob, with interest and a little disgust.  Here's a link to the article:
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/exclusives/concealed-carry-laws-state-by-state/

Here's the part that got me all huhu:
"May-issue systems lend themselves to the sort of decisions for which the legal system coined the term “arbitrary and capricious.” In Hawaii, for instance, while technically it’s possible to get a carry permit, it just isn’t possible in real world practice. I am aware of three having been issued there to private citizens during my adult lifetime. One went to the civilian armorer who serviced the Honolulu Police Department’s duty weapons. Another was held by the Governor, who got it when he was Lieutenant Governor. The third didn’t last long, a Honolulu Police Chief issued it to his sister-in-law, but had to take it back when the newspapers got wind of the story. On the other hand, I hear that a few hundred carry permits have been issued in the last few years to security guards in Hawaii."

Do you think we'll see concealed carry here in Hawaii in our life times?