Here's another update from Tom Berg on FB:

Good News! The Firing Range resolution for Kalaeloa is up for adoption/a vote to pass full City Council on November 2- and the meeting will NOT take place at Honolulu Hale but Kapolei Hale! Stay tuned for more details. The Mayor is against this reso- he went public that we need to wait for HCDA to approve our plan first. Boooo. That could take years. Boooo hisss- keep up the fight as this hearing Nov 2 will be a battle as one Councilmember- Breene Harimoto is against the reso passing as well.

The reso will either be on the 10am agenda on Nov 2- or the 1pm agenda...as soon as that decision is made by the Council Chair I will post- but please pass the word- gear up and prep and mark your calendars. I really think the reso passed in committee because so many came forward and submitted testimony- for the Nov 2 hearing, we must improve upon that to counter the Mayor and naysayers who want to wait, and wait, and wait.

HCDA, ahh another government red tape machine.

It is not negative to point out the truth. HPD and other LE agengies DO get to use the range and DO get to disregard the rules that the general public must adhere to. Do LEOs get to use human targets? Yes. Do they get to do "holster presentations?" Yes. Do they get to use the range when it's "closed?" Yes. Does anyone from the public get to do this? Nope.

They are not disregarding any rules.  They follow the rules that apply to their training needs.  The City as the employer has a duty to train many things.  Failure to do so would fall under deliberate indifference and we would all be paying out of our pockets.  Not only the City derives a direct benefit, but so do you and I and all tax payers.  I understand what you are attempting to say and I agree that the rules are different for LE and for the general shooting public.  If you want to look at it from the City side of things as a Civil Suit issue, failure to train LE can cost them money.  Allowing drawing from the holster, etc, etc, from the public can cost them money.  So yes, LE is not restricted by the all the same rules that the City imposes on the public shooters. Again, I am not saying that I agree with all the rules that exist.

As for shooting after hours, clubs have done night shoots, after normal park hours.  Again some people are their own worst enemies. 

I never said you did...it was a word of my choosing. I disagree with your assertion that it is not a lack of planning. Let me ask you how much the academy range was supposed to cost and when was it supposed to open? I will let you research the issue but suffice it to say that it went WAY over budget and was opened far later than planned.

I have no need to research the issue.  I understand it far too well.  Disagree all you like but there is a lot more to it than you make it sound.  Suffice it to say it was not a lack of planning on behalf of the HPD.  You might want to research and have a better understanding of how the City works, especially with approval of funding and the entire process works for getting anything done.  Not to mention the bid process and who wins them.  Pick the lowest bidder and you might just get what you pay for.  Your assertion is far more than a bit simplified. 

And, the point you make that the range is closed when HPD uses it (even if you cite lack of funding as the cause) is exactly what we are talking about. Why can't a club or organization that agrees to use a RSO or adhere to a reasonable and objective safety standard, use the range during "off" hours just like HPD? I am sure the presence of armed, law-abiding citizens would have much the same deterrent affect as you suggest the presence of HPD does.

As I mentioned earlier clubs have been approved to use range time after hours.  If they are having a difficult time getting range space now after hours, maybe we need to look at the reasons for this.  FWIW when HPD uses the range after hours, the time frame is the same as placed on the clubs.  I will say 99.9% that you won't hear a shot fired by an official HPD training event after 2000 hours.  Lets just say that the Hawaii Kai community will be on the phone at 2001 hours if this happens.  They also have a lot of pull.   

When I have to clean up the bay after anyone else uses it, I don't normally complain either...I just do it. But the point, again, is that if the general public were to treat the ranges in the same fashion as HPD, or any of the other LE agencies do, they would not be "invited" back. Yet LE agencies keep getting to use the range. It is, again, an obvious case of disparate treatment. One where the "public" is subject to much more strict rules and significantly harsher punishment than LE in the same situation.

Sorry but I will have to disagree with you when it comes to the HPD.  I am not speaking about the other LE agencies etc, who use the range.  I will say that the HPD only fires brass cased ammo.  That rarely lasts overnight and there are many people like Teichi who appreciates that.  I am sure he can tell you that he is not alone.  Rarely will this once fired brass last overnight.  Again I will say that there are some very thankful people on the rifle side who find boxes of policed up brass sitting on the benches (again only speaking about the HPD).  I rarely see the type of mess left on the lower ranges that I will find on a Monday.   

   

I think you miss the point here. He was not trying to say HPD officers are less likely to be given harsher sentences when convicted. He was saying that in the course of doing their duties, an officer that has an otherwise "good" shoot but has the misfortune of injuring or killing an innocent bystander, or shooting the "wrong" person, is provided a level of immunity from civil and criminal prosecution that a citizen, in the same situation would not be afforded. As for the summary ROPA of any officer accused of impropriety, I happen to think it is wrong. But, what I do find interesting is that one of the big complaints of officers so relieved of their police authority, is that they can no longer carry their firearm off-duty. After all, if relying on the police to protect you is good enough for the mere citizens of this state, why are police officers so upset about having to do so as well?

When good people have to go after bad people, there are times when bad things happen.  This really really sucks for everyone involved but it is reality.  However attempting to mitigate the possibilities of this happening is why the HPD has a legal and moral obligation to train their Officers, which ties into what was discussed above about why the HPD is afforded the ability to train.  We can cry all we want about allowing the public to have the ability to do more in their training, of which I agree and am a proponent, but coming off like HPD is violating some type of rules is silly.  They are following the rules set forth upon them. 

Again, I think you miss the point...if HPD is required to have an RSO and medic in order to use our public range duing the times "we" cannot, then why can't a club or organization that meets these requirements use the range in similar fashion and during those same off-times. I know that when I am at one of our shoots, we have an RSO and medic present. And, at least to the best of my knowledge, I do not think HPD has any TEMS trained medics routinely deployed. I know a couple of the officers are former medics, and that EMS has been training some of the officers is more advanced first aid, but it's not TEMS....

I never said the HPD is required to have a Medic on site during training.  I stated that certain units may have their own medics.  In brief on the TEMS topic, there are a lot more of them than you are obviously aware of.  Also there are HPD units who have EMT qualified personnel.  Not just former medics, but those who achieved EMT certifications after joining the HPD.  There are also a handful who have gone through Military combat medic courses which are more advanced than EMT courses. 

Where did I ever say that I am against public groups using range space during off hours?  I am NOT against it.  Suggesting anything otherwise is pure ignorance. 

It would be of more benefit to refrain from wording my posts to suit certain arguments / agenda's.  I am not against this community and many posts, including yours really are not helping the issues discussed here.  I am a very reasonable person, but I am under no obligation to help clarify anything.  Quite frankly, there is so much flat out incorrect information on SOP / MOP of the HPD that is discussed in many threads here.  I would think that correct information and certain other opinions would be an asset to the issues discussed here?

Look, the bottom line is that neither I, nor anyone (at least as far as I can tell...) expressing concern over this issue have any "distain" for the police. And, furthermore most would be happy to share the range with HPD and other LE agencies if it could do so under the same rules for using it. So it's not cop bashing to suggest that they (the LE community) have to play by the same rules as everyone else and that the public be given at least the same opportunities to use the only public range as they are. No more, NO LESS

I never suggested "distain" for the police.  As you mentioned you did as it was your choice of words.  If anyone wants to go crying to the City that the public should be allowed to shoot and or train in similar ways as does the HPD, they will not get very far.  I already gave reasons for the City's rebuttal.  Simple reasons that the courts mandate certain training to avoid failure to train and deliberate indifference of patently obvious needs for training placed upon all LE.  This need has not be set for the public and the City ears would be closed.  We may not like or agree with the argument, but any law school student could tell you that the City has a good reason to shoot any proposals down and no one, not even the City council would vote otherwise.  This is a liberal state and coming from that angle is setting ones self up for instant failure. 

Again I support the issues discussed.

Just got this from Councilman Berg's 10/1/11 email newsletter:

EFFORT TO GET PUBLIC FIRING RANGE IN KALAELOA

The turnout in support of taking a small pre-existing, abandoned firing range in Kalaeloa and turning it into a potential revenue maker for the city passed the Parks and Cultural Affairs Committee earlier this week. Good news - Reso 11-263 is to be put on the full Council's agenda for a vote on November 2- of which hearing will be held at KAPOLEI HALE! See television coverage.

Sorry if this is old and/or redundant information

http://www.mszu.de/

Check out the the German's indoor range. 25/100/300 meter rifle, Pistol Skeet,  Trap, Pro shop and Restaurant. I better brush up on my German. This place is on my bucket list.

Sorry Surf, but you are incorrect, or I may be splitting hairs, but at a PUBLIC range, (and the only public range at that) the rules should be the same for every one. Including the LE community.

So yes, LE is not restricted by the all the same rules that the City imposes on the public shooters. Again, I am not saying that I agree with all the rules that exist.

As for shooting after hours, clubs have done night shoots, after normal park hours.  Again some people are their own worst enemies.

 

Sorry again, but "not restricted by all the same rules" reads, to me, as being able to disregard the rules that we, John Q public must adhere to when using the range. As for "some People" being their own worst enemies, well, I think you should check up on the facts....in fact, there was ONE club that was allowed to do night shoots. When another entity tried to get range time at night, they were shot down and subsequent actions by the City (probably because they knew they were exposing themselves to legal challenges by disparate treatment....) was the reason the only club previously allowed to use the range at night "suddenly" lost that ability. No one, except HPD, has been able to use the range at night since....

I realize that the "government" has a duty to train in order to minimize their liability exposure, and I am actually fine with that. Again, my issue is the use of the public range, to the detriment of the public's ability to use the range, for police training. You can claim all the "it's for the greater good" and protection of the CIty from future legal claims, but it is, IMHO, a red herring that detracts from the admittedly simple concept of the public should be able to use their range, for their training, and that the police, with a viable alternative to satisfy their training needs, should not adversely affect that right. And, unless the range at the academy is running 24/7, then there is room to expanding the training opportunities there, which should lessen the need to use Kokohead.

And, speaking of the academy range, yes I did simplify it a bit, but not because of any lack of knowledge about the process by which City, State and Federal agencies have to use to procure services. But, the bottom line is that HPD had a measure of oversight of the project. That they OK'd the range to be opened only to discover the ventilation system was inadequate and that the subsequent delays were quite extended. There were other issues, but suffice it to say that HPD played no small role in some of the issues that caused the project to be over budget and delayed.

When I speak of the bays needing "cleaning" after use by LE (and I will be the first to admit I do not know if it is HPD or other agencies...) I am not talking about brass....I am talking about bottles and cans, used "humanoid" targets (another rule LE gets to "disregard" ), boxes and other refuse.

When good people have to go after bad people, there are times when bad things happen.  This really really sucks for everyone involved but it is reality.  However attempting to mitigate the possibilities of this happening is why the HPD has a legal and moral obligation to train their Officers, which ties into what was discussed above about why the HPD is afforded the ability to train.  We can cry all we want about allowing the public to have the ability to do more in their training, of which I agree and am a proponent, but coming off like HPD is violating some type of rules is silly.  They are following the rules set forth upon them.

 

And, when good people who are not LE have good reason to utilize the same tools that LE uses, and do not reap the benefit of qualified immunity in the tragic event a "bad" thing happens, the City and State have an arguably greater legal and moral obligation to allow citizens the ability to train in a similar fashion the LE community is allowed to do. And, personally, I take some offense to saying that trying to hold HPD to the same rules as regular users of the range is "silly." If shooting at humanoid targets is OK and beneficial to an objective training need for HPD, it should be OK for citizens to do the same. As far as I know, there is only one set of "rules" for the range, and many of those are unwritten or made up on the spot. I do not know of a second set of rules for LE, and that is the point. You can split hairs all you like in terms of the LE community not violating rules that "we" must adhere to because they "need" the training, but it seems pretty black and white to me. "We" have to follow the rules at the range, LE doesn't.

As for the TEMS issue, I think I understand the issue pretty good, even, dare I say, better than you. I know there are EMT's, and military trained medics, I even know of a couple of officers that were paramedics. I also know of current, ongoing training to officers, which although originally touted as "TEMS-like" is in reality far from any objective standards of a TEMS course.....and that, by the way, came from the admin responsible for doing the training.....so, if you have any officers certified in TEMS, point them out to the folks doing your training, 'cause they don't seem to know about them.

I appreciate that you think "we" should be able to use the range more often and in a simialr fashion as LE. I just disagree with your reasoning as to why LE gets a pass from many of the rules we now must adhere to....to that end, I think my position is pretty clear. It is obvious we disagree on terminology and possibly some philosophical issues, but I appreciate the conversation/debate. Because I recognize that an online forum may not confer all the nuances of a face-to-face discussion, I hope nothing I 'said' came across as attacking....and if so, it was unintentional.

Aloha

They (HPD) should have a shoot with the public day. 

They could teach the public some pointers on the good shoots and the no shoots, handling, and increase public awareness and relations all in one swoop.  Maybe the HPD and the gun owning public could build more trust with each other.  After all, they are doing the job they are paid to do, they do not make the unfair laws we all must abide by, they only enforce them.

Also, the public can experience the level of difficulty the officers qual course can be.

Sound like a good idea, or am I living in a pipe dream?? 

fwiw, the armed guard test is harder than the HPD test, so are the LEOSA quals.

They (HPD) should have a shoot with the public day. 

They could teach the public some pointers on the good shoots and the no shoots, handling, and increase public awareness and relations all in one swoop.  Maybe the HPD and the gun owning public could build more trust with each other.  After all, they are doing the job they are paid to do, they do not make the unfair laws we all must abide by, they only enforce them.

Also, the public can experience the level of difficulty the officers qual course can be.

Sound like a good idea, or am I living in a pipe dream??

Here's the issue I see with this one. With politically-correct, legislation-happy society: As unreasonable as people are, one WILL find a way to blame the homicide/manslaughter/wrongful death on the "paramilitary training" (<--- media spin) received by the city's occupying police force. Or, maybe there was a wrongful death; it could be from "lack of proper training" by the premier publicly-funded firearm training agency/program on the island.

Or maybe not. Who knows.

from what i've seen  law enforcement is one of the least trained when it comes to firearms knowledge and as far the HPD goes they may not be the ones making the rules but they sure are quick to say those rules somehow protect them from criminals. To me that puts them against our goals.

I've called HPD Firearms Section twice regarding my AR and both times was told magazine capacity limit is 10 rounds.  The law pertains to handguns and not rifles the way I understand it.  There are retailers that sell higher capacity magazines than 10.  I think they need some education  regarding the laws they are supposed to be knowledgeable about otherwise their enforcement is purely subjective.

I've called HPD Firearms Section twice regarding my AR and both times was told magazine capacity limit is 10 rounds.  The law pertains to handguns and not rifles the way I understand it.  There are retailers that sell higher capacity magazines than 10.  I think they need some education  regarding the laws they are supposed to be knowledgeable about otherwise their enforcement is purely subjective.

nothing to do with the range. Let's not go down that road about AR mags.

I've called HPD Firearms Section twice regarding my AR and both times was told magazine capacity limit is 10 rounds.  The law pertains to handguns and not rifles the way I understand it.  There are retailers that sell higher capacity magazines than 10.  I think they need some education  regarding the laws they are supposed to be knowledgeable about otherwise their enforcement is purely subjective.

The language of the statue is magazines "capable of being used" in handguns. With the statutory language defining a handgun as anything with a barrel less than 16 inches, most rifle magazines can be used in "handguns" and therefore are limited to 10 rounds.

You should review the prior threads on this subject to see a more detailed discussion onthe subject.

fwiw, the armed guard test is harder than the HPD test, so are the LEOSA quals.

I was speaking to a neighbor island cop a couple of weeks ago about this and he agrees....as someone who is going to retire soon he too was expressing his concerns that the quals for LEOSA are more stringent than those for active duty officers.....

Hey, Moderators...

Any chance we can split this topic?  There are those of us who really do want to stay abreast of developments in the firing range initiative, but couldn't care much less about debates over what HPD gets away with.    Just sayin'

Hey, Moderators...

Any chance we can split this topic?  There are those of us who really do want to stay abreast of developments in the firing range initiative, but couldn't care much less about debates over what HPD gets away with.    Just sayin'

I second the motion.

Quote from: Tom_G on October 04, 2011, 09:31:28 PM

Hey, Moderators...

Any chance we can split this topic?  There are those of us who really do want to stay abreast of developments in the firing range initiative, but couldn't care much less about debates over what HPD gets away with.    Just sayin'

I second the motion.

There is way to much shit to split, just get 

  The hearing is coming up today!  Hope all goes well, and I hope a lot of folks are able to attend.  If you have not submitted a letter do it now! haha!

Anyone have a update about how it went today?

All I know is, it passed. Now we play the waiting game.