https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2018/bills/SCR9_.pdf

S. CHANG, BAKER, ESPERO, GALUTERIA, Dela Cruz, Ihara, Inouye, K. Kahele, Kidani, Shimabukuro, L. Thielen, Wakai

More tyrannical bullshit from our legislators. This one (SCR9) has got me boiling. It's a "Senate Concurrent Resolution" appeal to Congress to defeat national concealed carry reciprocity. In a series of "whereas"s, they mention all the problems this would cause for Hawaii while stating several times that Hawaii has it's own "local" standards for issuing concealed carry licenses. What they fail to mention, as one of the biggest lies of omission ever, is that that local standard results in Hawaii being the only state in the union, and D.C. too, that has not issued even one single license to any resident of the entire state for years (four total in the past 18 years). I'm going to write each signee and tell them what I think, but I have to cool down first, as at present I'm inclined to use language that [deleted].

These people are in total violation of their oath of office to uphold both the Hawaii state and U.S. Constitutions. Hell, in the Hawaii constitution Article I, section 17 is even titled "RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS".

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Section 17.  A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

I've asked every state legislator to explain to me how they can not act to void a law that clearly violates their oath of office, and none of them ever respond to me. I wonder why? [Expletives deleted].

Would this letter even matter?  We all know Schatz, Hirono, Hanabusa, and Gabbard won't support the bill anyways.

Or does this letter go above our Hawaii senators and to someone higher?

I think every bit matters because these people are living the Ainokea I do wutIlike attitude to the fullest

Would this letter even matter?  We all know Schatz, Hirono, Hanabusa, and Gabbard won't support the bill anyways.

Or does this letter go above our Hawaii senators and to someone higher?

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this Concurrent Resolution be transmitted to the Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and Hawaii's congressional delegation."

Seeing how

   I do not " lack good moral character or lack good moral cause to carry concealed handguns, have no history of domestic disturbances or mental health concerns, no felony stalking conviction, am not an abusive domestic partner and or subject to restraining orders, have been subjected to and passed a criminal history check and therefore have been determined not to be too dangerous or reckless to carry concealed firearms, have had safety training, firearm safety training (and CCW Training in addition to being legally licensed to train others for the application for non -resident CCW honored in 35 states), and that
 "this body reiterates its support for common-sense gun legislation to keep guns out of dangerous hands, including standards that ensure people cannot legally carry guns concealed in Hawaii communities without proper safety training or if they pose a danger to the public"
I therefore fulfill all of the obligations, recommendations and restrictions required to be issued a State of Hawaii CCW License.
 

     A friend has told me " I'm sure lots of people are thinking the exact same thing... it just leaves out (as the resolution does) that you are NOT an "exceptional case"... and there aren't any in the entire state of Hawaii... and have only been 4 in 18 years... I wonder why they didn't mention that in the resolution! "

    I've often wondered if I (we) could some how get (FOIA) what the "exceptional case" reason used in the 4 permits allowed was. 
None would be best ! 

     A friend has told me " I'm sure lots of people are thinking the exact same thing... it just leaves out (as the resolution does) that you are NOT an "exceptional case"... and there aren't any in the entire state of Hawaii... and have only been 4 in 18 years... I wonder why they didn't mention that in the resolution! "

    I've often wondered if I (we) could some how get (FOIA) what the "exceptional case" reason used in the 4 permits allowed was. 
None would be best ! 

I already tried that. Maui PD claims there are no extant records of the two CCW licenses issued there in 2001, and that no one who might have been on the force at the time and is still there remembers anything. Since they claimed no records existed, I couldn't ask for the records via UIPA (Uniform Information Practices Act, Hawaii's version FOIA) request. I UIPA requested from Kauai PD the any and all records in any format (blah blah blah boilerplate) re the CCW licenses they issued in 2006 and 2013, espeically with regards to both the claims considered "exceptional case" and all the paperwork and notes re the decision making process and application of standards in making the decisions to grant or deny. Kauai PD, not unexpectedly did nothing. I then appealed through the OIP appeal process, which basically is an attorney from OIP asks Kauai PD to respond to the request. Kauai PD then sent me two single page poorly reproduced copies of the applications, with some information redacted, except they left the names of the applicants unredacted EVEN THOUGH I HAD SPECIFICALLY STATED IN MY OIPA REQUEST THAT I WAS NOT SEEKING ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE APPLICANTS/GRANTEES AT ALL! Go figure. There was no information at all about the reason for seeking or granting the license. It did make clear that the one licensee was a judge, and that the other was likely a military member. I UIPAed Hawaii county PD also asking for their criteria, and they refused to respond except to quote the "exceptional case" statute that I had quoted to them when asking for the standards and criteria they used to make a decision in determining what was or wasn't "an exceptional case". When I appealed they claimed all that information was attorney client privileged and thus protected. The only remaining option was to file a lawsuit and I have/had neither the requisite knowledge to file a lawsuit that was likely to succeed, nor the funds to hire a lawyer... and I could find no one to take the case pro bono and the ACLU turned me down. And that's that.

Edited to change OIPA to UIPA, Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA), administered by the OIP (Office of Information Practices). It was a few years ago...

I called Hudson's office because I can't email him because I don't have a NC zip code.  I told the guy on the phone about the letter and can email him a copy.  I want them to have a heads up and all the BS that the letter states.  He said "I wouldn't worry about it.  We got many like this the entire time and it still passed the house".