https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2023/11/27/man-28-arrested-terroristic-threatening-after-pointing-gun-2-people/


Only a terroristic threatening charge in the HPD arrest log as of today. No places to keep charge, unregistered gun charge, no CCW permit charge,etc...

Very little surprises me nowadays.

If it was me, the whole book would have been thrown at me.

But yeah, sure looks like it's one of those "Eh, dat's so and so's sista's braddahs nephew's son who is da cousin of my faddah's uncle."

"Let um go.  Bumbye we get in trouble.....".

But for law-abiding people like us it's:  "Ooooh, look.....criminal......"

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2023/11/27/man-28-arrested-terroristic-threatening-after-pointing-gun-2-people/


Only a terroristic threatening charge in the HPD arrest log as of today. No places to keep charge, unregistered gun charge, no CCW permit charge,etc...

HPD will arrest based on the crimes they observe.

The DA will investigate, and any additional charges can be added.

Don't look at the HPD log as the complete story.  Not only will there be an investigation, there will be negotiations.  The result may be dropping the terroristic threatening charge in favor of lesser crime(s).

HPD will arrest based on the crimes they observe.

The DA will investigate, and any additional charges can be added.

Don't look at the HPD log as the complete story.  Not only will there be an investigation, there will be negotiations.  The result may be dropping the terroristic threatening charge in favor of lesser crime(s).

I get that. But how did they observe an unregistered handgun and not charge listed on the log?  I do think having to reg is unconstitutional, so good for him if he's not charged with this or any of the other stuff as long as he's not a prohibited person.


***edit
Or news was wrong about the gun being un-registered.  He has a CCW license too, which is why no places to keep charge and stuff.

Not much information and what we got was vague.  But it could set us back with or without a CCW.

Criminal records show DUI and a dismissed assault charge and was previously a security guard.  Nothing stopping him from getting a gun legally and probably could've gotten a CCW.

Altercation can mean a lot of different things and it could be justified.  Coming to the aid of a 3rd person with a ripped guy picking a fight with a 80 year old security guard could be justified.  I hope he didn't point the gun at the security guard.

If someone is in Kailua, stop by food land and ask what happened.  I've noticed foodlands have a guard at the entrance.

radio 101.9 said he pointed the gun at both the security guard and the other guy.

radio 101.9 said he pointed the gun at both the security guard and the other guy.

Isn't that brandishing?

Isn't that brandishing?

What HRS section covers brandishing?

IF the gun really wasn’t registered, I’d be pretty surprised if he’d have an LTC.

You’ve got to prove to HPD that the gun you’re applying for an LTC for is registered before they’ll give you the LTC.  If you’re law-abiding enough to register a handgun and go through the rigamarole to get an LTC, why would you take the risk to carry an unregistered gun…?

What HRS section covers brandishing?

I dunno.  I just thought brandishing was a no-no.  I figure it would be in this anti-2a state.

I dunno.  I just thought brandishing was a no-no.  I figure it would be in this anti-2a state.

I’m not saying it’s not there, I just haven’t been able to find it.  That’s probably why he caught a terroristic threatening charge.

Terroristic threatening, defined.  A person commits the offense of terroristic threatening if the person threatens, by word or conduct, to cause bodily injury to another person or serious damage or harm to property, including the pets or livestock, of another or to commit a felony:
     (1)  With the intent to terrorize, or in reckless disregard of the risk of terrorizing, another person; or
     (2)  With intent to cause, or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation.

HPD will arrest based on the crimes they observe.

The DA will investigate, and any additional charges can be added.

Don't look at the HPD log as the complete story.  Not only will there be an investigation, there will be negotiations.  The result may be dropping the terroristic threatening charge in favor of lesser crime(s).

Correct.
Cops have to test fire the gun to make sure it is a real functioning firearm in order to prove the place to keep charge however they could still arrest initially for it if they thought it looked like a real gun then the case could be downgraded or dropped later if evidence shows otherwise.

Correct.
Cops have to test fire the gun to make sure it is a real functioning firearm in order to prove the place to keep charge however they could still arrest initially for it if they thought it looked like a real gun then the case could be downgraded or dropped later if evidence shows otherwise.

So it would be legal to carry around a non-functioning gun?  What about a gun that jammed on the first round, that means it didn't function. (All rhetorical). Would that be OK?  As I have never looked into this specifically, but I assume what you're saying makes no sense.  Maybe Flapp can chime in as he post more credible info.

radio 101.9 said he pointed the gun at both the security guard and the other guy.

Double barrel ? 

So it would be legal to carry around a non-functioning gun?  What about a gun that jammed on the first round, that means it didn't function. (All rhetorical). Would that be OK?  As I have never looked into this specifically, but I assume what you're saying makes no sense.  Maybe Flapp can chime in as he post more credible info.

§707-716 Terroristic threatening in the first degree  includes

use of a e) With the use of a dangerous instrument or a simulated firearm. For purposes of this section, "simulated firearm" means any object that:

(i) Substantially resembles a firearm;

(ii) Can reasonably be perceived to be a firearm; or

(iii) Is used or brandished as a firearm;

This is the only place in Hawaii law where I can find the word "brandishing".
All other instances refer to it as "Terroristic threatening"

§707-716 Terroristic threatening in the first degree  includes

use of a e) With the use of a dangerous instrument or a simulated firearm. For purposes of this section, "simulated firearm" means any object that:

(i) Substantially resembles a firearm;

(ii) Can reasonably be perceived to be a firearm; or

(iii) Is used or brandished as a firearm;

This is the only place in Hawaii law where I can find the word "brandishing".
All other instances refer to it as "Terroristic threatening"

I think the new law (SB1230) might have something in there as well, but IIRC it only applies to legal CCW holders.  Going from memory, so I may be wrong as it might have been in 1 of the drafts and deleted.

This guy is worse than a corrupt cop.

What was he going to do if they neva listen to him when he pointed the gun at them?

He going shoot them?

"Oh no, officer I was just trying to make dem scaid....."

So it would be legal to carry around a non-functioning gun?  What about a gun that jammed on the first round, that means it didn't function. (All rhetorical). Would that be OK?  As I have never looked into this specifically, but I assume what you're saying makes no sense.  Maybe Flapp can chime in as he post more credible info.

Carrying around a non-functioning replica, for example, would still be a crime.

Revised ordinances of honolulu
41-11.2 Prohibitions.
(a)   No person shall carry or display a replica gun on any street, alley, public road, or on any public lands, unless such replica gun is in a suitable case or securely wrapped.
(b)   No person shall draw or brandish a replica gun in the presence of a law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of the law enforcement officer’s duties.
(c)   Nothing in this article shall be deemed to prevent any person who has obtained a hunting license pursuant to HRS Chapter 183D from engaging in hunting in accordance with law.
(d)   In the event a replica gun is also an “air gun”, as defined in § 41-10.1, the exceptions in § 41-10.4 shall also be exceptions to the prohibitions in this article.
(e)   Nothing in this article shall prevent carrying or display of a replica gun by a person involved in a living history presentation or other activity for historical interpretation or educational purposes, or by a person participating in a parade if such activity or parade participant is associated with an established historical organization, museum, military preservation organization, or other group with a mission to educate the public at various events through the use of historical artifacts, clothing, vehicles, aircraft, maritime vessels, and firearms or replicas thereof.

Carrying around a non-functioning replica, for example, would still be a crime.

Based upon which statute?

Please, educate us.

Based upon which statute?

Please, educate us.

See above post, I was editing it to add section when you replied.