HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit) (Read 51290 times)

zippz

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #240 on: January 30, 2026, 05:02:49 PM »
Kapolei Cheesecake Factory doesn't want 2A business, No Guns signage on the front door, but that doesn't seem to be hurting their business model any.  Olive Garden on the other side of the parking lot doesn't have No Guns signage, so that's the 2A alternative.

Requires an organized boycott, publicity, and sign waivers outside.  Would be difficult as cheesecake factory is always busy and filled with a lot of tourists that don't care.

hvybarrels

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #241 on: January 30, 2026, 05:15:37 PM »
Waikiki is like a foreign economic zone. It would be better to support pro 2a business than to attack those who don’t share our values.
I’m becoming clinically undepressed and thinking about beginning it all.

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #242 on: March 19, 2026, 11:18:39 AM »
For those without social media

Hawaiʻi Firearms Coalition recently obtained a series of documents from the Attorney General’s office through a UIPA request.
These records provide insight into how the State of Hawaiʻi defended its firearm laws in federal court — including litigation that reached the United States Supreme Court.
Over the next several days, we will be releasing all 14 documents in this set. Our goal is to provide transparency and help the public better understand how outside counsel was selected, how agreements were structured, and how these cases were handled behind the scenes.
This is not about speculation — it is about sharing the actual records and allowing the public to see the process for themselves.
📄 Document 1: Executed Georgetown ICAP Proposal (June 23, 2023)
The first document is an agreement between the State of Hawaiʻi and the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) at Georgetown Law.
In this agreement:
• ICAP agrees to represent the State as co-counsel in Wolford v. Lopez, a federal case challenging Hawaiʻi’s firearm laws
• The representation is provided at no cost to the State for attorney fees
• The agreement allows ICAP to assist with litigation, including appeals
• Law students may also support the case under attorney supervision
• The scope of work is limited specifically to this case
This document shows the State beginning to assemble a team of outside legal counsel — including nationally recognized constitutional litigators — to defend its laws.
We will continue releasing additional documents in the coming days, including materials related to the selection of outside counsel, contract approvals, and associated expenses.
💬 We want to hear from you:
As we release each document, take a look and let us know what stands out to you. What do you think are the most important details or takeaways?
Follow along as we review each document and explain what it means.

changemyoil66

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #243 on: March 19, 2026, 11:24:56 AM »
Interesting name "Institute for Constitutonal Advocacy and Protection". Nothing they're doing is advocacy or protection of the 2A with regard to this lawsuit.

Hawaii: We're going to protect your 2a right by making more laws for you.
ICAP: Sounds like youre protecting the people's right.

zippz

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #244 on: March 19, 2026, 12:10:41 PM »
Interesting name "Institute for Constitutonal Advocacy and Protection". Nothing they're doing is advocacy or protection of the 2A with regard to this lawsuit.

Hawaii: We're going to protect your 2a right by making more laws for you.
ICAP: Sounds like youre protecting the people's right.

hvybarrels

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #245 on: March 19, 2026, 01:24:50 PM »
"Your honor I'm here to testify on behalf of the Institute for Raising Taxes and Making Things Worse"

"Proceed"

"Thank you your honor, as you can see we've been very busy lately..."
I’m becoming clinically undepressed and thinking about beginning it all.

Wchiro

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #246 on: March 23, 2026, 05:46:52 PM »
Kapolei Cheesecake Factory doesn't want 2A business, No Guns signage on the front door, but that doesn't seem to be hurting their business model any.  Olive Garden on the other side of the parking lot doesn't have No Guns signage, so that's the 2A alternative.



If you are in their establishment unable to CCW and something happens (robbery, active shooting...) while you are there remember to keep your receipt (proof you were there at the time) and sue them because they denied you your rights. Make it costly to them for denying your rights and the rights of others to CCW on their premises.  They put you in danger especially if they don't have armed security.  JMO  ;)

kopjecat

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #247 on: March 24, 2026, 09:36:30 PM »
If you are in their establishment unable to CCW and something happens (robbery, active shooting...) while you are there remember to keep your receipt (proof you were there at the time) and sue them because they denied you your rights. Make it costly to them for denying your rights and the rights of others to CCW on their premises.  They put you in danger especially if they don't have armed security.  JMO  ;)

The Chessecake Factory sign doesn't meet the requirements posted on the https://www.oneoahu.org/sensitive-places page.  According to that C&C page, the sign must be 8.5 x 11", and placed not less than 40" and not more than 60" from the bottom of the door.  That could be helpful if someone had to defend themselves in court for carrying in that location.

zippz

Re: HIFICO, Wolford etal vs. Lopez (Hawaii State Sensitive Places Lawsuit)
« Reply #248 on: March 24, 2026, 09:53:29 PM »
The Chessecake Factory sign doesn't meet the requirements posted on the https://www.oneoahu.org/sensitive-places page.  According to that C&C page, the sign must be 8.5 x 11", and placed not less than 40" and not more than 60" from the bottom of the door.  That could be helpful if someone had to defend themselves in court for carrying in that location.

State law, which has no defined signage requirement, overrides the county requirements.  So any sign that clearly says no guns allowed is all they need.  It should be reasonably legible and visible to people entering the establishment.

A person should respect the establishments property rights and not carry there.  Best to leave a bad review and take your money where it's appreciated.