Looks like they are wasting no time again. Never let a crisis, imagined or otherwise, go to waste.

http://thefederalistpapers.org/second-amendment-2/lawmakers-assault-rifle-ban



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I'm not sure if I agree with this.

https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/562901849/this-gun-instructor-says-many-who-carry-a-gun-aren-t-trained-to-respond-to-a-shooter

“First of all, the idea that in a small-town Baptist Church in rural Texas, that there weren’t people in the church with guns is absurd. And why nobody jumped up with a gun is because people aren’t trained to do that. And if you’re sitting in a church and you’re praying and, you know, it’s a moment of quiet and solitude and everything else, even if you’ve got a gun, and somebody comes in open the front door and starts blasting away, you’re going to do what everybody does: You’re going to hit the floor. The idea that the average citizen, even if he’s had a little bit of — I don’t want to call it training, just experience in using a gun, because it’s not training — you don’t get trained by just a little time at the range and having some guy tell you, ‘OK, you know, point the gun here. Bang, bang, bang.’ That’s not training.”

I'm not sure if I agree with this.

https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/562901849/this-gun-instructor-says-many-who-carry-a-gun-aren-t-trained-to-respond-to-a-shooter

“First of all, the idea that in a small-town Baptist Church in rural Texas, that there weren’t people in the church with guns is absurd. And why nobody jumped up with a gun is because people aren’t trained to do that. And if you’re sitting in a church and you’re praying and, you know, it’s a moment of quiet and solitude and everything else, even if you’ve got a gun, and somebody comes in open the front door and starts blasting away, you’re going to do what everybody does: You’re going to hit the floor. The idea that the average citizen, even if he’s had a little bit of — I don’t want to call it training, just experience in using a gun, because it’s not training — you don’t get trained by just a little time at the range and having some guy tell you, ‘OK, you know, point the gun here. Bang, bang, bang.’ That’s not training.”

he should listen to what the guy who shot back said
"everyone said, 'you are gonna freeze' if someone starts to shoot, why do you think you need to train to shoot?" and guess what, he didn't freeze
he said he was scared, but he did the right thing to protect his family and his town

Hawaii law makers, are right now, drafting dozens of bills to put forward as we speak, IMO.  2A in this state will be severely decimated in the upcoming session.  Hawaii's gun owners will be put to the test very shortly.   

Hawaii law makers, are right now, drafting dozens of bills to put forward as we speak, IMO.  2A in this state will be severely decimated in the upcoming session.  Hawaii's gun owners will be put to the test very shortly.

Anything specific or are we suspecting all of the crap in California to be attempted here in addition with some sort of resurrection of SB 219 from 2013?

I've only been doing this since late 2014 and sent a "preemptive email" to several representatives and heads of committees today:

Sample:

Aloha ________________,

As another legislative year approaches, I wish to express some concerns as a law-abiding member of the Hawaii Second Amendment “community”. Recent horrific events on the US Mainland has again brought up conversations in political circles about either repealing or continuing to dismantle the rights of honest hard-working citizens. The most recent event in Texas may seem like a clear indication that the confiscation of legally-owned semi-automatic rifles from the hands of citizens is a “sensible” response as a result of the actions of one deranged and evil individual. However, as the facts are being released, it is clear that the current Federal laws already in place are NOT being adhered to by government employees tasked with ensuring due diligence to keep firearms out of the hands of prohibited persons - in this case a domestic abuser. Article “US Airforce FAILED to relay info":  http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/politics/texas-church-shooting-bad-conduct-discharge/index.html

With regards to concerns in Hawaii, I previously contacted several representatives, including Mr. Gregg Takayama, requesting consideration that the Second Amendment Rights of Hawaii residents be “left alone” in the face of political rhetoric. It seems that now, more than ever, there is a deliberate attempt to attempt to legislate morality in spite of the current political party in place within three of the top branches of Federal government.

In 2013, we saw a local attempt to essentially rob law-abiding citizens of their right to bear certain arms despite no local issues relating to legally owned semi-auto rifles. In that year 2013 SB 219, to my memory, did not make it out of committee (2013 SB 219 text for reference:  https://trackbill.com/bill/hi-sb219-firearms-assault-weapons-machine-guns-ban/567260/).

My fear for 2018 is that a similar bill may find its way into the new legislative session in a second attempt to punish the thousands of law-abiding citizens in Hawaii for again the actions of individuals on the US Mainland. This cannot be ethical regardless of one’s political views and loyalties. As I have mentioned in my previous email to you (see below), Hawaii is a special place with special people and it is our “Aloha Spirit” that dictates how we treat each other. We are not perfect, but we are unique and the honest law-abiding gun owners of Hawaii Nei do not deserve to become political pawns between the two dominant political parties in this country.

I ask once again, as an elected representative, that you carefully consider these realities when any “anti-2ndAmendment” legislation surfaces next year.

Let’s focus on ensuring the background checks conducted at gun shops are indeed complete and done correctly. Let’s focus on ensuring that our state mental health records are accurate. Let’s focus on ensuring that prohibited persons are not taking advantage of “straw purchases” (i.e. using a qualified individual to purchase a firearm on their behalf) and offending parties are charged appropriately with a felony. Focusing on firearms that have been lawfully owned for decades by citizens is not the righteous answer.

I feel that in order for legislation to be effective in curbing unforeseen violence, it must be enforced consistantly without prejudice. However, drafting bill after bill and contemplating confiscation of legally-obtained firearms from law-abiding citizens and potentially turning them into felons overnight only reinforces the public perception that politicians no longer respect the Constitution of these United States.

Hawaii law makers, are right now, drafting dozens of bills to put forward as we speak, IMO.  2A in this state will be severely decimated in the upcoming session.  Hawaii's gun owners will be put to the test very shortly.

Nothing will pass att he Federal Level, but at the State level the Democratic puppets will be in the lead to pass all their bans here.

That's a nice letter that Palisadeskid wrote.

I'm not sure if I agree with this.

https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/562901849/this-gun-instructor-says-many-who-carry-a-gun-aren-t-trained-to-respond-to-a-shooter

“First of all, the idea that in a small-town Baptist Church in rural Texas, that there weren’t people in the church with guns is absurd. And why nobody jumped up with a gun is because people aren’t trained to do that. And if you’re sitting in a church and you’re praying and, you know, it’s a moment of quiet and solitude and everything else, even if you’ve got a gun, and somebody comes in open the front door and starts blasting away, you’re going to do what everybody does: You’re going to hit the floor. The idea that the average citizen, even if he’s had a little bit of — I don’t want to call it training, just experience in using a gun, because it’s not training — you don’t get trained by just a little time at the range and having some guy tell you, ‘OK, you know, point the gun here. Bang, bang, bang.’ That’s not training.”

Training or not these things do not happen in a vacuum, u cant monday morning quarterback these life and death events. Its more about your instincts, subconscious reactions then anything.
Men that consider themself brave find themselfs useing there wifes as a shield. Men or women u would discount,hurl themselfs into danger to shield a loved one. For every 10 that hit the ground theres 1 who would stand there and return fire. Its nothing to be proud or ashamed of its just how your body reacts. This is why law abidding citizens should be granted the right to carry, u dont know in thoses frist seconds of action who U are let alone the person next to u.

Training or not these things do not happen in a vacuum, u cant monday morning quarterback these life and death events. Its more about your instincts, subconscious reactions then anything.
Men that consider themself brave find themselfs useing there wifes as a shield. Men or women u would discount,hurl themselfs into danger to shield a loved one. For every 10 that hit the ground theres 1 who would stand there and return fire. Its nothing to be proud or ashamed of its just how your body reacts. This is why law abidding citizens should be granted the right to carry, u dont know in thoses frist seconds of action who U are let alone the person next to u.

Faced with these types of situations, what do you see cops using?  ARs, sniper rifles, and ballistic vests in superior numbers.

People act like concealed carry is some sort of "magic bullet" against terror attacks, but it isn't.  And it really isn't fair to ask these individuals to go after criminals in horrible tactical situations when law enforcement wouldnt either!  Concealed carry is best abled to defend against assailants with equal or less firepower when the defensive carry is unexpected.  Someone with a snub nosed 38 surprised by an assailant with an AR carrying unlimited mags and wearing a ballistic vest isn't going to be able to take him out under normal circumstances. If he fires upon the shooter, he will be able to distract him, potentially saving lives, and likely get killed in the process.  It is not the duty of a concealed carry holder to commit suicide in this manner, he has the right to make that choice.  If at the time, defending himself and his family means hiding behind a pew along with everyone else, then that's what it means.

And the more people willing to lawfully carry, the better; as someone may find themselves in a situation where they can make a difference with relatively low risk (such as being to the side or behind the shooter).  The guy who took down the shooter had equal firepower (AR vs AR), less ammunition, and no ballistic vest protection, but he did have the element of surprise, and was able to take out the shooter.  In a protracted conflict with no element of surprise, things may have turned out very differently

Good story, but they're not going to read it.  This would be a lot more effective if you made an appointment and talk to your legislator in person.  If you're going to write it, get straight to the point.

Anything specific or are we suspecting all of the crap in California to be attempted here in addition with some sort of resurrection of SB 219 from 2013?

I've only been doing this since late 2014 and sent a "preemptive email" to several representatives and heads of committees today:

Sample:

Aloha ________________,
 

Training or not these things do not happen in a vacuum, u cant monday morning quarterback these life and death events. Its more about your instincts, subconscious reactions then anything.
Men that consider themself brave find themselfs useing there wifes as a shield. Men or women u would discount,hurl themselfs into danger to shield a loved one. For every 10 that hit the ground theres 1 who would stand there and return fire. Its nothing to be proud or ashamed of its just how your body reacts. This is why law abidding citizens should be granted the right to carry, u dont know in thoses frist seconds of action who U are let alone the person next to u.

I agree with the article, 95% of CCW holders would at best be a distraction for a few seconds in this situation if they did react, many probably would not fire back unless the shooter was right on them and by then it would be too late.  If there were multiple CCW holders in the church then the "herd" mentality would take effect where they won't fire until someone else fires.  You would need the mindset and considerable training and scenario practice for a situation like this.  I know very few non-law enforcement that have this.

I agree with the article, 95% of CCW holders would at best be a distraction for a few seconds in this situation if they did react, many probably would not fire back unless the shooter was right on them and by then it would be too late.  If there were multiple CCW holders in the church then the "herd" mentality would take effect where they won't fire until someone else fires.  You would need the mindset and considerable training and scenario practice for a situation like this.  I know very few non-law enforcement that have this.

Where'd you get 95% ?

ban knives! But of course this will fall on deaf ears...<sarcasm>
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/f4569e96-00f8-363a-9d67-f8c0d757d2cc/ss_multiple-people-stabbed-at.html

ban knives! But of course this will fall on deaf ears...<sarcasm>
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/f4569e96-00f8-363a-9d67-f8c0d757d2cc/ss_multiple-people-stabbed-at.html

Police identified the suspect as 20-year-old Mahad Abdiaziz Abdirahaman of Minneapolis, CBS Minnesota reports. He's being held on two counts of first-degree assault.
peace and love...