Aloha all,

I generally think that I keep up on legislative issues, but boy did this one slip under my radar. And, considering what this resolution asked for, I am estatic that it is just a resolution.

Seems some of our representatives wanted to send a message to our Federal legislators. That message? Repeal or "modify" the Second Amendment. There were other aspects to the reso, including declaring "Obamacare" constitutional. It was introduced by Reps. RHOADS, C. LEE, TAKUMI, Choy, Ichiyama, Keith-Agaran, M. Lee and has passed the House and moves to the Senate.

Here's a link to the bill

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HCR&billnumber=114

It received two pieces of testimony, both against, but why wasn't such an "important" resolution more widely known? The fact that during these difficult times these bozos would wasted both time and money on this nonsence is just dumbfounding.....we should make sure the voters of Hawaii remember this in November, or any time these fools come up for election.

fifth day of fours hours of sleep.  Can you please point it out to me? Am I missing something in the resolution.  I see ACA, filibusters, electoral college, and confirmation hearings.

fifth day of fours hours of sleep.  Can you please point it out to me? Am I missing something in the resolution.  I see ACA, filibusters, electoral college, and confirmation hearings.

Sorry, I could have been clearer, but was rushing. The original version had the language related to the Second Amendment, the version that passed (with help from some "friends" ) has the wording removed. The "Obamacare" stuff and other language remains.

Hi carry......no matter what these dummies do the people of hawaii will still vote them in office.Its really hard for the conservatives or 2a people. You see most hawaii people have a 2nd to 3rd grade reading level. So to use their brain to figure out that the democrats are crooks is near impossible. and when you DO find some one the answer is always the same" they all crooks so why should I vote". I explain logically that 90% of all elected public officials or more are democrats so if their crooks they are democrats!!!!! To no avail. This local plantation mentality here on the big island is really pathetic.Even in the churches. In my church>>>>>>> they are conservative in church(homosexuality, abortion, etc) but still vote for the very ones that promote the very un-Godly lifestyle I preach against on sunday. I am dumbfounded. But as they say when it comes to conceal carry" keep hawaii-hawaii". Yet vote as far left as people do like the mainland does. It is only for their benefit and no other. God Bless Me.
Pastor Dennis

This is somewhat alarming that local media has not brought this to light.  Are they scared that the people actually might not want obamacare, and organize a protest? Nah...
Im glad the 2A wording has been removed, but that doesn't mean they wont bring it up at a Con-Con.

This is somewhat alarming that local media has not brought this to light.  Are they scared that the people actually might not want obamacare, and organize a protest? Nah...
Im glad the 2A wording has been removed, but that doesn't mean they wont bring it up at a Con-Con.

If its brought up at a Con-Con... it would be to expand the rights guaranteed under the 2a.  Hawaii would not be happy with the results.

<anger>

Funtimes said,

"...it would be to expand the rights guaranteed under the 2a."

I am very sorry to point this out again, but you do not seem to recognize that the rights spelled out by 2a are unequivocal.  We've got into this before.

It's the lawyerly hemming and hawing and legislating over the past ten decades about these unequivocal rights that got us to the point where people (like you) have to sue the officials to re-assert that unequivocal right.  Note the singular in that sentence.

It's not the right that has to be expanded, it's the infringements on that right that have to be "un-expanded."

Sorry if that gets you mad, and I apologize in advance, but that's the way I see it.  Some folks have been so steeped in their local and federal gun laws for so long that they seem like the natural state of affairs.

I say it again, redundantly, that I legally bought my first handgun from a department store with no paperwork, no registration, no training, no permit, no nothing.  I paid my money and walked out the door with it, and could carry it openly wherever I wanted.

That, Funtimes, is the natural state of affairs.

The only infringement was the sales tax.

</anger>

There.  I said it, and I ain't takin' it back.

Terry, 230RN

Funtimes said,

"...it would be to expand the rights guaranteed under the 2a."

It's not the right that has to be expanded, it's the infringements on that right that have to be "un-expanded."

While I see and appreciate the philosophical differences in the language, I just have to say that from a pragmatic standpoint, arguing whether the glass is half full or half empty doesn't change the fact that someone has taken half of my whiskey, and I want it back!

^ LOL --Well put, and I'm going to steal that line without remorse or giving you even the slightest bit of credit.

^ LOL --Well put, and I'm going to steal that line without remorse or giving you even the slightest bit of credit.

Steal my intellectual property?  Go right ahead!  But if it ever crosses your mind to steal my liquor, well, be aware my demeanor can change rather dramatically!