1 reason why I refuse to spend $ at 808GC, even with Kokohead being closed.

""Just because let's say the County of Honolulu allows concealed carry, just because you can, doesn't mean you should," Tomimbang said. "Humans are humans. They might just act on their emotions, thinking that they carry a gun. You know, now they think their life is in danger. Hopefully the people who are issued permits have the right temperament."

https://www.kitv.com/news/city-proposes-rules-banning-firearms-in-sensitive-places-as-it-prepares-for-the-public-carrying/article_a0cb2e1c-406a-11ed-89d8-3714d6400e81.html?fbclid=IwAR1NCzQ_ZsD2V4S6j021YuP4K4LJUaRBMBQgff2DBuGOi2UJiWhP0Dd8guc#tncms-source=block-contextual-fallback2

Well he is retired HPD. The RSO at 808 also RSOs at Kokohead

Well he is retired HPD. The RSO at 808 also RSOs at Kokohead

Guy is cool.  He helps a lot, especially the noobs like how we were.  He has not made any negative/anti 2a comments like the owner has (not the 1st time).  But at the same time, I have never seen his name on testimony.  I think he's at the age where he's too old to care.  I'm pretty sure he has the "the older I get, the less jail is a threat" attitude.  IDK what he did prior to 2016.

i didnt say anything on the other post. and i still dont really wanna say anything. but you guys need to look into kitv, its ownership, and reevaluate their rent agreement in your heads.

i didnt say anything on the other post. and i still dont really wanna say anything. but you guys need to look into kitv, its ownership, and reevaluate their rent agreement in your heads.

Tell us so we can make informed decisions.

The statement made is pretty clear and not taken out of context.  Unless the statement is untrue, then he should def sue them for quoting something he never stated.

What a life we could live if things were black and white. . .

What a life we could live if things were black and white. . .

"It doesn't matter if you're black or white...cheeeeeeeheeeeee. Jamone"

"It doesn't matter if you're black or white...cheeeeeeeheeeeee. Jamone"

I'm colorblind. . . 

Tell us so we can make informed decisions.

The statement made is pretty clear and not taken out of context.  Unless the statement is untrue, then he should def sue them for quoting something he never stated.

the statement is 100% taken out of context because there is no context. in an interview, there is a question then an answer. think about it. does the reporter just stick the microphone in your face and let you talk about anything you want?

watch the video and pay attention to the cuts. Just imagine if the two quoted statements seperated by "tomimbang said" were said half an hour apart from each other. Im not saying thats what happened. im just saying what if.

edit: I just watched the video again and there are 2 cuts making those actually 3 seperate statements. i am biased against kitv, so i wont say what i think is happening there. but you can probly figure it out I hope.

the statement is 100% taken out of context because there is no context. in an interview, there is a question then an answer. think about it. does the reporter just stick the microphone in your face and let you talk about anything you want?

watch the video and pay attention to the cuts. Just imagine if the two quoted statements seperated by "tomimbang said" were said half an hour apart from each other. Im not saying thats what happened. im just saying what if.

edit: I just watched the video again and there are 2 cuts making those actually 3 separate statements. i am biased against kitv, so i wont say what i think is happening there. but you can probly figure it out I hope.

"the statement is 100% taken out of context because there is no context." So you agree with my statement then.

I did think about this as well.  I also though about what kind of question could be asked that he responded with "Just because let's say the County of Honolulu allows concealed carry, just because you can, doesn't mean you should" and then its used against him.  I couldn't come up with anything, unless he was quoting something that someone else said.  This is why I mentioned context. And I have never seen our local news use a quote of a quote with regard to 2A rights and edit it so that it's not a quote of a quote.  Or something else like if his full sentence was:  "The anti gun movement would say "Just because let's say the County of Honolulu allows concealed carry, just because you can, doesn't mean you should".

As someone who's pro 2a, I would never make this statement to a known anti 2A news station because they are looking for ammo to support gun control. So if he isn't smart enough to realize that and be careful with his words, then so be it.  Then add in the 2nd part about temperament. He is giving fuel to the anti 2a lawmakers to use temperament as a reason to be approved.   So combine the entire edited portions.  It's either a total fake news story or not.

As something to compare it to, Andrew from HIFICO has been interview many times and has never made a statement like this.  He does interviews with various reporters, so it's not like it's the same reporter who is pro 2a and protects him from these types of comments.  Nor is he edited like the above.

So maybe this 1 story had amazing editing to make him look like he doesn't support CCW.  But sometimes the simplest answer is the true answer. 

Now we get into a huge whataboutism.

The problem with his statement is, unless he actually stopped where the quote stopped, he should have gone a bit further. I tried to come up with examples of what he might have said instead or additionally, but I was on my 4th example when I realized ANYTHING would have been better than leaving it with the quote provided.

"Nobody WANTS to shoot someone else if they can avoid it,"
"The Hawaii Justice System will punish you even if you were in the right legally and morally,"
"Wearing a gun changes you, makes you more responsible, less likely to engage in an altercation, and more likely to just walk away if someone is provoking you,"
"Government and anti-gun activists are the wrong people to dictate to gun owners where, when, how and why we should carry in public -- it's an individual decision,"
"The Left labels itself Pro-Choice while also being mostly anti-2A. Shouldn't all rights be a choice left up to the individual. not government?,"
and on and on.

Without elaborating further, the quote on its on is damaging to the perception of concealed-carrying gun owners.

The problem with his statement is, unless he actually stopped where the quote stopped, he should have gone a bit further. I tried to come up with examples of what he might have said instead or additionally, but I was on my 4th example when I realized ANYTHING would have been better than leaving it with the quote provided.

"Nobody WANTS to shoot someone else if they can avoid it,"
"The Hawaii Justice System will punish you even if you were in the right legally and morally,"
"Wearing a gun changes you, makes you more responsible, less likely to engage in an altercation, and more likely to just walk away if someone is provoking you,"
"Government and anti-gun activists are the wrong people to dictate to gun owners where, when, how and why we should carry in public -- it's an individual decision,"
"The Left labels itself Pro-Choice while also being mostly anti-2A. Shouldn't all rights be a choice left up to the individual. not government?,"
and on and on.

Without elaborating further, the quote on its on is damaging to the perception of concealed-carrying gun owners.

Did you watch the video and pay attention to the cuts? They cut his first statement short and only present the part which makes it seem like anti-2a.

Now Im not a customer of 808gc, I dont know this person. so excust my ignorance, but I believe the owner of a gun range would not be anti-2a. being duped by a reporter and then having your words cut and edited to make it seem like you are anti-2a seems much more plausible to me. I could be 100% wrong, but at the very least the video edits and the way the statements are presented are very suspect. If you pay attention to the kind of stuff coming out of kitv then its a lot easier to make jump to that conclusion as well.

"the statement is 100% taken out of context because there is no context." So you agree with my statement then.

I did think about this as well.  I also though about what kind of question could be asked that he responded with "Just because let's say the County of Honolulu allows concealed carry, just because you can, doesn't mean you should" and then its used against him.  I couldn't come up with anything, unless he was quoting something that someone else said.  This is why I mentioned context. And I have never seen our local news use a quote of a quote with regard to 2A rights and edit it so that it's not a quote of a quote.  Or something else like if his full sentence was:  "The anti gun movement would say "Just because let's say the County of Honolulu allows concealed carry, just because you can, doesn't mean you should".

As someone who's pro 2a, I would never make this statement to a known anti 2A news station because they are looking for ammo to support gun control. So if he isn't smart enough to realize that and be careful with his words, then so be it.  Then add in the 2nd part about temperament. He is giving fuel to the anti 2a lawmakers to use temperament as a reason to be approved.   So combine the entire edited portions.  It's either a total fake news story or not.

As something to compare it to, Andrew from HIFICO has been interview many times and has never made a statement like this.  He does interviews with various reporters, so it's not like it's the same reporter who is pro 2a and protects him from these types of comments.  Nor is he edited like the above.

So maybe this 1 story had amazing editing to make him look like he doesn't support CCW.  But sometimes the simplest answer is the true answer. 

Now we get into a huge whataboutism.

NO. I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH YOU. but you have made it clear that you dont like 808gc and so i forgive you for choosing to doubledown.

Did you watch the video and pay attention to the cuts? They cut his first statement short and only present the part which makes it seem like anti-2a.

Now Im not a customer of 808gc, I dont know this person. so excust my ignorance, but I believe the owner of a gun range would not be anti-2a. being duped by a reporter and then having your words cut and edited to make it seem like you are anti-2a seems much more plausible to me. I could be 100% wrong, but at the very least the video edits and the way the statements are presented are very suspect. If you pay attention to the kind of stuff coming out of kitv then its a lot easier to make jump to that conclusion as well.

Can't tell what was cut, because it was .... you know .... "cut."

I like their shop. Good location. Tough to find parking. Nice RSO. Probably had a bad interview with anti-gun KITV. Well, I can't think of any local media that is really for the people...except for that guy that sells cars..Billy V.

Did you watch the video and pay attention to the cuts? They cut his first statement short and only present the part which makes it seem like anti-2a.

Now Im not a customer of 808gc, I dont know this person. so excust my ignorance, but I believe the owner of a gun range would not be anti-2a. being duped by a reporter and then having your words cut and edited to make it seem like you are anti-2a seems much more plausible to me. I could be 100% wrong, but at the very least the video edits and the way the statements are presented are very suspect. If you pay attention to the kind of stuff coming out of kitv then its a lot easier to make jump to that conclusion as well.

Thank you for clarifying your experience and would make sense why you're giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Here is mine:I have shopped in this store before and have received a anti 2a vibe that a gun store should not have.  Not only from the owner, but from a few employees (manager included) as well since he took over.  I did not get this vibe from the previous owner/employees, going back 2 prior owners. 1 employee worked for the prior owner and is still there.  He is OK.

This is why my post is titled "Another reason".  So if you add in all my prior XP and the statements made, the continuity of not being a full 2A supporter remains. 

I have only seen him at 1 in person hearing (pre-covid) and it was only for a bill that affected him.  He did not stay for the other anti 2a bills.  I have not see his name on any testimony or as the gun store for other bills that don't affect only him.  This was when HI tried to pass a law that only the owner of the caliber of gun can buy ammo of that caliber. Which means for a rental range, the customer cannot shoot anything.  Someone else here posted that he has written more testimony for other bills.   So I could have just missed it.  But I read thru all testimonies over the years so his name should have stuck out and the odds of me missing over 20 testimonies by him or his company is not likely.  So he isn't consistent.  I don't expect every bill for him to testify against, but enough so his name sticks out.

With regard to the selling of Tasers, he required you to take a $150 class just to buy one.  The law doesn't state a 6 hour class is required.  The law states an "informational briefing" needs to be done. So 15 mins and done.  At first other stores thought a class was required and charged the same.  But after getting clarification, many stores dropped the 6 hour class and $150.  808GC didn't.

There is more, I just can't remember everything right now.  So with all the above being said, I take his statements as face value.  You can choose to think otherwise and even choose to spend money at his shop.  It's your choice.

NO. I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH YOU. but you have made it clear that you dont like 808gc and so i forgive you for choosing to doubledown.

There is no need to forgive anything.I am not doublingdown, I am explaining my logic behind my post to you so you can understand why I posted what I did. 

I'm colorblind. . . 

What!?  There are red and green colored people?   

Best thing to do is next person who goes there ask the owner to explain.

I definitely agree with "just because you can, doesn't mean you should"

Yes, owning a gun is a protected right. But, if you are not confident in owning or carrying one, you really shouldn't. My dad and I are both gun owners, but he gets nervous handling a gun pistol/rifle even at the range. I don't think he should CCW until he is completely confident in his ability to securely carry, draw, aim, fire, and reholster, but he's currently in a stage where just loading and unloading a gun makes him nervous. He passed all of the "tests" to legally own and presumably CCW, but he definitely should not.

I also know people who are like "I like shoot dis guy, shoot dat faka" etc. and those people probably should not carry guns either. I think Tom is just saying people should make a good choice in whether to carry, not just carry one "because I can".