I'm sure Mr. Chin, with his steadfast abhorrence of Trump's "illegal" "ban" on immigrants from six countries, has merely misplaced his public statement on how he will disavow the state's ban on possession of electronic guns/devices, declare that ban unconsitutional (as per New Jersey AG below), and ask the legislature to immediately remedy the situation by revising the appropriate HRS sections. Or am I being too optimistic? I mean, the quoted "Heller, McDonald, and Caetano" are Supreme Court decisions and apply to Hawaii, which I'm sure the AG knows... And he's the head "law enforcement" officer of the state... so...

From David Codrea:

New Jersey Activists Win Major Concession from State on ‘Electronic Arms’

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/04/new-jersey-activists-win-major-concession-from-state-on-electronic-arms/#axzz4eL1Se2UO

Excerpts:

In a “stunning” development for the right to keep and bear arms advocates, New Jersey Attorney General Christopher S. Porrino has agreed that the state’s total ban on electronic arms such as tasers and stun guns is unconstitutional.

“Pursuant to the holdings in Heller, McDonald and Caetano, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:39-3(h), to the extent this statute outright prohibits, under criminal penalty, individuals from possessing electronic arms, is declared unconstitutional in that it violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and shall not be enforced,” the consent order declares.

This would be great, we need more less than lethal options.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

This would be great, we need more less than lethal options.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Did this allow regular stun guns, or the ones that shoot the projectile also?

Did this allow regular stun guns, or the ones that shoot the projectile also?

Can't answer that yet.

Under the proposed consent decree, the state acknowledged the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental
right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. However, the state would be permitted to impose "reasonable limits"
on stun guns.

A federal judge must approve the consent decree, which would give the state 180 days to craft regulations "consistent
with public safety and the Second Amendment" governing the possession of stun guns.

While supporters say stun guns are a nonlethal form of protection, there have been dozens of lawsuits filed against
police departments after suspects zapped with stun guns have died.

http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2017/04/nj_moves_closer_to_settling_stun_gun_ban_lawsuit.html

Maybe as the blue staters prep to take on Trump supporters like at Berkeley, they will loosen controls of lethal  and non-lethal weapons so more of their black shirts can be armed.   Won't hold my breath but that would be winnaz.
I agree HI needs to allow "we the people" the right to all the non-lethal and lethal weapons platforms available to LE since as I believe, we are the real first responders.

Maybe as the blue staters prep to take on Trump supporters like at Berkeley, they will loosen controls of lethal  and non-lethal weapons so more of their black shirts can be armed.   Won't hold my breath but that would be winnaz.
I agree HI needs to allow "we the people" the right to all the non-lethal and lethal weapons platforms available to LE since as I believe, we are the real first responders.

Using a stun gun would still be assault.  I'd like to see the video of one guy or gal using a stun gun get pummeled by 5 Trump supporters!

Another step and confirmation today that stun gun bans are unconstitutional (still waiting for the Hawaii AG to acknowledge this and stop enforcing the law here). Note that one of the attorneys (partnered with Alan Beck/Wolfwood et al.) sent notification of these decisions to a New York judge (becauses that NY law, like Hawaii's is a ban on possession) and the NY AG declared, in direct contradiction to the court decisions, that there is NO constitutional right possess a stun gun even in your own home (exactly the position of Hawaii bureaucrats/politicians).

Judge Confirms NJ Stun Gun Ban Violates 2nd Amendment, Orders Enforcement Halt

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/04/judge-confirms-nj-stun-gun-ban-violates-2nd-amendment-orders-enforcement-halt/

Excerpts:

New Jersey’s ban on electronic arms is an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment and the state must stop enforcing it, a federal judge ordered Tuesday. Judge Michael A. Shipp of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Vicinage of Trenton, issued the order in the matter of New Jersey Second Amendment Society and Mark Cheeseman vs. New Jersey Attorney General Christopher S. Porrino  and Superintendent of the New Jersey State Police, Col. Rick Fuentes.

The court order comes on the heels of a consent order proposed by Porrino, a breaking development reported exclusively on April12 by AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

“Pursuant to the holdings in Heller, McDonald and Caetano, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:39-3(h), to the extent this statute outright prohibits, under criminal penalty, individuals from possessing electronic arms, is declared unconstitutional in that it violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and shall not be enforced,” the consent order admitted.

Judge Shipp agreed, and issued Tuesday’s court order to include:

“The Second Amendment guarantees individuals a fundamental right to keep and bear arms for self-defense … Further, ‘the Second Amendment extends prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.’”

“[The New Jersey statute] is declared unconstitutional in that it violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and shall not be enforced.”

“[The New Jersey statute] shall not be enforced to the extent this statute prohibits, under criminal penalty, the sale or shipment of Tasers or other electronic arms…”

“[A]ny and all proceedings in this matter are hereby stayed for a period of 180 days until such time that any necessary revisions to existing controlling legal authorities may be implemented…”

As noted in the previous AmmoLand report, Stamboulieh sent a notification letter to U.S. District Judge David N. Hurd, in the matter of Avitabile, et al. v. Cuomo, et al., to advise him of the essential similarity between New York law and New Jersey law. Per another AmmoLand report filed in March, New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman insists there is no right to own a taser or a stun gun even in a citizen’s own home.

I  litigated both the NJ and NY cases with my partner.  Along with the New Orleans and Annapolis Maryland cases. 
We've gotten the stun gun laws repealed everywhere but NY so far.  NY is still in the works. \
CIR is litigating a case in Mass. that I am not a part of. 
I am thinking about Rhode Island.next.
Hawaii's ban will go whenever the Ninth hears the Young appeal.

I  litigated both the NJ and NY cases with my partner.  Along with the New Orleans and Annapolis Maryland cases. 
We've gotten the stun gun laws repealed everywhere but NY so far.  NY is still in the works. \
CIR is litigating a case in Mass. that I am not a part of. 
I am thinking about Rhode Island.next.
Hawaii's ban will go whenever the Ninth hears the Young appeal.

Thank you for your efforts! 

I knew it was challenged in Young, but wasn't sure if there needed to be a separate case solely addressing the electronic weapons in the event Young is dismissed/defeated in whole or part.

Thank you for your efforts! 

I knew it was challenged in Young, but wasn't sure if there needed to be a separate case solely addressing the electronic weapons in the event Young is dismissed/defeated in whole or part.

Young is going to be at the Ninth for a couple more years so if you want the taser law to go away I suggest that you and a few of your friends raise money. I am sure that there are many local lawyers willing to take that case if they were paid a fair rate.