Thanks, PunaPerson.
If I hear you right, it's like saying:
In other words, let us carry.
We jumped through many checks and laws just to "aquire"!
It's like this: Eleven (11) states already have so-called "constitutional carry", which I prefer to call "permitless carry", which allows citizens (in Idaho and Wyoming residents only) to carry concealed handguns without applying to the government for permission to exercise the Constitutionally-guaranteed "right to keep
and bear arms", which according to the U.S. and Hawaii state constitutions "shall not be infringed". Four (4) more states have slightly limited forms of permitless carry ("outside cities" or "unloaded weapon with loaded magazine"). Legislatures in a number of other states have passed such legislation, only to have it vetoed by the governor. One of those states now has a new governor of a different party (Republican) who will likely sign the bill when it passes again next year. "Both
McDonald v. Chicago and
Moore v. Madigan clarified that the core of the right is to bear arms for self-defense. And more crimes (where self-defense would be useful) are committed outside the home than inside the home.
All those states with permitless carry, and all those states with "shall issue" concealed and/or open carry (many states have permitless open carry) have many years of record-keeping regarding the degree of lawful behavior by this firearm bearing segment of the population. Florida began issuing CCW permits in 1987, so they have lots of data, as now 2 million Florida residents have permits. Generally speaking, cops are more law-abiding than the non-law enforcement segment of the population, committing crimes at approximately one-third (1/3) the rate of the general populous. The permit-holding population commits crimes at one-third (1/3) to one-sixth (1/6)(depending on exactly which "crimes" are included in the statistical measurement)
of the cops. In other words, you're at least three times (possibly six times) more likely to be the victim of a crime committed by a cop than by a concealed carry permit holder.
Thus my suggested bill above (delete all government requirements to carry concealed or open). There is absolutely no evidence
that will withstand critical scrutiny that would provide the slightest justification for the assertion that denying people the right to bear arms in public is a "public safety" issue. None. Yes, there is "evidence" manufactured by the "public health" sector physicians who have entire lifelong careers based upon earning grants from citizen disarmament organizations, but those studies don't meet the standard of holding up under critical scrutiny.
In other words, the claim of the Hawaii law enforcement community, and vast majority of legislators, that carrying in public is a "public safety issue", is a ruse, a subterfuge, a diversion, or to put it more directly and less politically correctly, a bald-faced lie. Why would they lie about such a thing? I leave that up to readers to decide that for themselves.
I have asked everyone, from the governor and the attorney general on down to legislators and police chiefs to provide me with evidence and/or a justification or rationale as to why Hawaii residents would be any less responsible than all the other licensed/permitted concealed and open carriers (over 14 million, and the likely millions more in states where no license is required), in all the other states where there is no history of any "public safety" hazard, and thus are denied that right (zero (0) licenses in the entire state) to bear arms for self-defense. Are you surprised that not one single one of them has ever even answered my queries, much less actually provided an answer as to why Hawaii residents are, in their view, incompetent and irresponsible bumbling idiots? But that's what they think of us. That's what they think of you. Nice.