no ammoh...

If only you owned firearms, you could take the prof test. . . oh, and a holster. . .

get it right- tactical man purse

Or purse. Don't assume the carry method.

get it right- tactical man purse

I have never seen you use this...it must be camo pattern.

Jump through all of these hoops and find out there is no place to CCW legally.

Looks like this will be the reality.

What did Y'all expect?
You are dealing with un-ethical animals.
Elected, appointed, government officials.
Cut their funds.
 

tangarine...

The 9 ring is about a "Jabone"

I'll try to shoot the "standard" in an IPSC target.  Will assume all A zone in time constraints would be passing.  I don't think I have any B29 handy. 

I have never seen you use this...it must be camo pattern.

concealed. . .

are holster retention methods, requirements specified somewhere?  I didn't see that in the 8-9 page doc.

are holster retention methods, requirements specified somewhere?  I didn't see that in the 8-9 page doc.

I took "applicant's holster" as open.  I was told the retention was removed.  Didn't see it in there on the link above, but didn't look super close.

are holster retention methods, requirements specified somewhere?  I didn't see that in the 8-9 page doc.

There are no retention requirements.

Maybe inexperienced voters should have to prove proficiency too.... I mean we are dealing with RIGHTS and not privileges like driving a car or anything. Lord knows driving through Waipahu is an experience everyone should go through.

From a purely basic viewpoint, operating a firearm is magnitudes simpler and easier than operating a motor vehicle.

People have to go through weeks of driver's ed and, depending on age, log many hours of practice with a licensed adult before being allowed to try and pass both a written and hands-on driving test.  Some new drivers spend lots of money on private lessons.  Many don't pas their first time trying take the test.  My younger daughter had to take it 3 times.

Ignoring the "right versus privilege: argument, the proficiency test should be a cake walk for most of us.  Anyone with the eyesight, coordination and confidence to use their pistol for self defense will have no problem after a few hours of instruction and practice.  In fact, I think the written test on state laws will be harder than the live fire test for most.

Obviously, I don't like the testing at all. It's just as unconstitutional, arbitrary and infringing as the "exceptional need" BS requirement.  But, the state issues the licenses (will issue?), so they get to decide on the rules to a point.

At this stage, just turning the tables and making this a "shall issue" state is a major victory.  Personally, I'm more miffed at the 1 year expiration period than the qualification test, primarily because I am an "experienced" gun owner who doesn't need several range visits to practice to be confident I can pass.  Having to jump through the same hoops annually is a waste of time, money and resources for both the licensee and the state.

From a purely basic viewpoint, operating a firearm is magnitudes simpler and easier than operating a motor vehicle.

People have to go through weeks of driver's ed and, depending on age, log many hours of practice with a licensed adult before being allowed to try and pass both a written and hands-on driving test.  Some new drivers spend lots of money on private lessons.  Many don't pas their first time trying take the test.  My younger daughter had to take it 3 times.

Ignoring the "right versus privilege: argument, the proficiency test should be a cake walk for most of us.  Anyone with the eyesight, coordination and confidence to use their pistol for self defense will have no problem after a few hours of instruction and practice.  In fact, I think the written test on state laws will be harder than the live fire test for most.

Obviously, I don't like the testing at all. It's just as unconstitutional, arbitrary and infringing as the "exceptional need" BS requirement.  But, the state issues the licenses (will issue?), so they get to decide on the rules to a point.

At this stage, just turning the tables and making this a "shall issue" state is a major victory.  Personally, I'm more miffed at the 1 year expiration period than the qualification test, primarily because I am an "experienced" gun owner who doesn't need several range visits to practice to be confident I can pass.  Having to jump through the same hoops annually is a waste of time, money and resources for both the licensee and the state.

What it also does is sets precedent for stricter quals later.  Like 10rd mags is an arbitrary #, why not 3 rds or like in NY, no can load more than 7 rds inside a 10rd blocked mag.

Then the state will use this as part of their argument for lawsuits later.

I took "applicant's holster" as open.  I was told the retention was removed.  Didn't see it in there on the link above, but didn't look super close.

I tried to do a search on the PDF posted.  Nothing came back as found no matter what I tried, including "HONOLULU".

I then downloaded the PDF, but still couldn't search.

Then I noticed the rubber stamped "NOV 20 2022" all over the document.  They must have scanned the file as an image -- meaning it's not searchable text.

So, I used Adobe's online converter to change the PDF to a Word document.  Now I can search it.  It loses some of the formatting, and some words are misspelled, but it's close enough.

RESULTS
The word "holster" only appears in the section listing the qualification test procedures, and the only use of "retention" appears in the list of topics to be included in the classroom training: firearm retention.

The word "level" has been completely omitted, as in "level two."

 

Thought I seen something about a psychiatrist in there still?

Thought I seen something about a psychiatrist in there still?

Yep. 

If you have lived in Hawaii the past 5 years, you just do the normal authorizations to release your HIPAA-protected files.

However, if you lived outside of Hawaii in the past 5 years, or had a 180 consecutive period outside the state the last  5 years, you get "special scrutiny:"

(b)   If the applicant became a resident of Hawaii within the five years preceding the date of the application, or if the applicant became a resident of Hawaii more than five years prior to the date of the application and lived outside of Hawaii for more than 180 consecutive days within the five years preceding the date of the application, the applicant shall provide mental health information as follows:

(I)   Mental health records from the health department of every state, province, or equivalent governmental unit outside of Hawaii where the applicant lived for more than l 80 consecutive days within the five years preceding the date of the application, to be sent directly to the Honolulu Police Department from the governmental entity. Applicants who, within the five years preceding the date of the application, were stationed outside Hawaii due to federal government service shall have mental health records sent to the Honolulu Police Department from the relevant federal governmental entity, but need not obtain records from the foreign or out-of-state government. Applicants who did not live in any location for more than 180 consecutive days shall provide an explanation to the Honolulu Police Department; or

(2)      Certification from a physician, psychologist, or psychiatrist, licensed to practice in Hawaii and completed no earlier than 90 days before submission of the application, attesting to the applicant's mental fitness to carry a firearm, provided that the physician, psychologist, or psychiatrist shall personally evaluate the applicant for no less than 45 minutes before so attesting, and provided further that nothing in these rules shall require any health care professional to conduct such examinations.

Thought I seen something about a psychiatrist in there still?

That was if you lived outside of HI for 5 years or something.

I tried to do a search on the PDF posted.  Nothing came back as found no matter what I tried, including "HONOLULU".

SNIP

The word "level" has been completely omitted, as in "level two."

 

Thanks.  Overall, the "devil details" are in the who administers this test.  I haven't been looking into them that closely, but know folks who have.  From what I've been told, it could take up to 40+ hours to get the credentials. . . 

Thanks.  Overall, the "devil details" are in the who administers this test.  I haven't been looking into them that closely, but know folks who have.  From what I've been told, it could take up to 40+ hours to get the credentials. . . 

The new rules are still a cluster fu*k.

1) It states you cannot apply until  you completed everything. Yes, all applicant's must do X, Y, Z when applying.
2) The 90 day rule would violate the 2 year rule of not having to do the classwork again for renewals
3) The chief can still limit when someone can carry, as in time of day, etc...

Basically, like Tasers, instead of keeping it simple, HI loves to add in many pages of rubbish.

The new rules are still a cluster fu*k.

1) It states you cannot apply until  you completed everything. Yes, all applicant's must do X, Y, Z when applying.
2) The 90 day rule would violate the 2 year rule of not having to do the classwork again for renewals
3) The chief can still limit when someone can carry, as in time of day, etc...

Basically, like Tasers, instead of keeping it simple, HI loves to add in many pages of rubbish.

The more "trip wires" they add to the rules (which are not actually law), the more chance they have of you stepping on one and losing your rights.

Typical anti-gun, anti-2A mindset.  Make the licensing process and use so convoluted, you're more likely than not to violate some portion of the rules -- giving them grounds to deny/restrict your legal authorization to carry.

The new rules are still a cluster fu*k.

1) It states you cannot apply until  you completed everything. Yes, all applicant's must do X, Y, Z when applying.
2) The 90 day rule would violate the 2 year rule of not having to do the classwork again for renewals
3) The chief can still limit when someone can carry, as in time of day, etc...

Basically, like Tasers, instead of keeping it simple, HI loves to add in many pages of rubbish.

Speaking of tasers, when are you going to get tased? 

Speaking of tasers, when are you going to get tased?

No need ammo cause range closed.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk