Hi...new here, but I've been lurking for awhile. I noticed nothing has been said recently about SB-327, I heard it died off. To be honest, that was good and bad. Bad for the reason that it would have been a slight improvement over what we have now.
But good that it died off due to its current writing. That bill needs alot of changing before it will greater support. I posted a link to the bill below, but here are a few highlights....
"Knowledge or aptitude in any other area deemed necessary for licensure by the chief of police of the appropriate county."
Anything that the chief deems "necessary"......WIDE OPEN""Has been deemed a suitable person to be so licensed by the issuing police officer through means of a face-to-face interview;"
Just what does a suitable person look like???"A written psychological evaluation that finds the applicant to be free from any emotional or mental condition that might adversely affect the ability of the applicant to carry a concealed pistol or revolver in a safe, lawful, and responsible manner. The psychological evaluation shall have been performed within six months prior to the date of application. Emotional and mental condition shall be evaluated by either of the following:
(A) A licensed psychiatrist who has at least the equivalent of five full-time years of experience in the diagnosis and treatment of emotional and mental disorders, including the equivalent of three full-time years accrued after completion of the postgraduate medical residency education program in psychiatry; or
(B) A licensed psychologist who has at least the equivalent of five full-time years of experience in the diagnosis and treatment of emotional and
mental disorders, including the equivalent of three full-time years accrued post-doctorate.
Any costs associated with obtaining the psychological evaluation shall be borne by the applicant."
This ain't cheap, and its a bogus requirement."If the chief of police fails to issue or deny the license within forty-five days after the date of receipt of the items listed in subsection (e) or within such further time as may be necessary under subsection (f) (3), the application shall be deemed denied..."
If he has no reason to want to issue a permit, he can just sit on it until 45 days are up....NOT GOOD.http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2009/bills/SB327_.PDFPlus they will require fingerprints again, Don't we ALREADY provide fingerprints for a permit to aquire???
Too many loopholes in this bill IMO.