Just wanted to know your thoughts on this question: If the laws in Hawaii were such that people who legally possessed firearms could open/conceal carry firearms without having to obtain a permit, what would the practical effect be on society and society behaviors be, good or bad?

For example, do you believe it would affect the crime rate? Would the rate of violence decline/increase? Etc.

Sorry if this question has been raised before. I tried to do a search before posting on this subject and came up with 36 pages-worth of postings.

For me it would make me a lot more comfortable going fishing at night, I've run into a lot of trouble makers while out fishing in some areas and those experiences made it so I won't even go to west or north shore without a large group of friends. I just hates how defenseless I felt in those moments and how frustrating it was not having the full means of my god given rights to defend myself. Not that I would ever want to harm someone but I'm sure a lot of punks will instantly lose their tough guy egos and back off once they see a red laser dot in the middle of there chest.

From a society point of view I think crime would naturally go down just because crimanls will think twice before attacking someone.

The streets would run red with blood and their would be shoot outs in parking lots for a parking spot.
Just kidding
I think it would be great to give people legal options for self defense outside of the home.
Hopefully crime would go down as a result and not increase because people would beat others to steal their gun.
The best part about it is if you not comfortable carrying then don't.
As a society though, especially living on an island, I could see the victims family getting angry at you and possibly seeking retaliation because, you know, he was a gud boy.

it would be a much safer and more polite society.

Im all for either open or concealed carry but I just think the public isn't informed or educated enough, I watched tons of youtube videos on how open carriers get harassed by cops and cops also give the reason for stopping them, even though theyre not breaking any laws, that the public call 911 when you walk around with a gun cause theyre scared or it makes them nervous. This makes no sense to me at all because a criminal wouldn't be walking around flashing his gun and I personally feel safer with someone with a gun around if some stuff went down. So I honestly think a positive effect would only take place after a lot of education for the public on this topic as well as the whole notion that gun=bad, violence, mass shooting mantra that people have been conditioned to learn by the media. So in all I think at first the effect would be a negative reaction until some real public education can be taught and erase the bad aura surrounding guns that people have been overly exposed to.

Open carry should be legal, and concealed carry should be both legal and the norm.   

By concealing firearms:

#1 - you will not cause a firearm carrier to be targeted to steal his gun

#2 - you will make it more difficult for bad guys to see who is and isn't "packing heat"

#3 - you'll reduce the anxiety of people in public by not displaying a firearm in the open

Concealed carry, to me, has more advantages that open carry, but in some circumstances (on ones own property or at a formal shooting event) open carry might be more appropriate.

"the people who could legally possess"

we all have our own opinions on the matter and the answers you're going to get on a pro-2a board will be in exact opposite of the other side. 

to borrow a leftist tactic, IMO if open/ccw could Prevent just One Rape then it's all worth it.   

Just wanted to know your thoughts on this question: If the laws in Hawaii were such that people who legally possessed firearms could open/conceal carry firearms without having to obtain a permit, what would the practical effect be on society and society behaviors be, good or bad?

For example, do you believe it would affect the crime rate? Would the rate of violence decline/increase? Etc.

Sorry if this question has been raised before. I tried to do a search before posting on this subject and came up with 36 pages-worth of postings.

An armed society is a polite society.

Violent crimes would go down.

All good points.

I can understand the sentiment of those who would feel safer being able to open/conceal carry and to be able to protect oneself when trouble makers are encountered but would the sentiment change if all people carried, good and/or bad? I would assume that  open/concealed carry is legal without restrictions, just about everyone may potentially carry a firearm.

It's reasonable  to me that crime would go down if open/concealed carry was permitted without restrictions. However, would it result in more violent confrontations with would-be criminals? For example, would shoving matches between two road rage individuals involved in a fender-bender on Kalanianaole Hwy turn into a shootout at the OK Corral with bystanders joining in the firearm festivities?  Knowing that their is a greater likelihood of encountering an armed victim, would it result in having criminals, hell-bent on committing a crime, strike hard with extreme violence and strike fast, first? Would it result in higher incidents of serious injuries or even death between individuals who have less than a reasonable degree of control over their anger (e.g., road rage confrontations, bar brawls, sporting events, etc.) or do you think that the threat of serious injury or death would be so great (sounds weird but I'm thinking about two nuclear super power countries unwilling to use their weapons of mass destruction as an example here ) that there will be, overall, a substantial reduction in violent crimes?

All good points.

I can understand the sentiment of those who would feel safer being able to open/conceal carry and to be able to protect oneself when trouble makers are encountered but would the sentiment change if all people carried, good and/or bad?

It seems logical to me that crime would go down if open/concealed carry was permitted without restrictions. However, would that result in more violent confrontations with would-be criminals? Knowing that their is a greater likelihood of encountering an armed victim, would it result in having criminals, hell-bent on committing a crime, strike hard and strike fast, first? Would it result in higher incidents of serious injuries or even death between individuals who have less than a reasonable degree of control over their anger (e.g., road rage confrontations, bar brawls, etc.) or do you think that the threat of serious injury or death would be so great (sounds weird but I'm thinking about two nuclear super power countries unwilling to use their weapons of mass destruction as an example here ) that there will be a substantial reduction in violent crimes?

Not a valid hypothetical.  There are plenty of examples in the US where more people owned and carried guns, and crime rates dropped, in particular violent crimes.  This question doesn't require thoughtful insight or deductive reasoning.  The answer is available for all to see.  As gun ownership and CCW increases, crime diminishes.

When sheep start shooting back, it's not as much fun being a wolf.

Criminals will tend to pick on the weak and defensless, that is how they operate.  They would gravitate to places that dissallow firearms and target those areas.

(sounds weird but I'm thinking about two nuclear super power countries unwilling to use their weapons of mass destruction as an example here )

Excellent comparison.

As soon as countries started arming themselves with nukes, they stopped going to war.

If the criminal fears that everyone is armed, he will stop trying to rob and steal from the elderly and weak.

"God created all men. Samuel Colt made them equal."