Jared From Guns and Gadgets posted something today that got me interested in "researching"

This is from the 1978 State of Hawaii "Constitution Convention" 

https://lrb.hawaii.gov/constitution/#articlei


RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Section 17.  A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

Hmmm...Yet the State of Hawaii "INFRINGES" on our rights?

Wow

Aloha!

yup
it's in the hawaii state constitution...

Jared From Guns and Gadgets posted something today that got me interested in "researching"

This is from the 1978 State of Hawaii "Constitution Convention" 

https://lrb.hawaii.gov/constitution/#articlei


RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Section 17.  A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

Hmmm...Yet the State of Hawaii "INFRINGES" on our rights?

Wow

Aloha!

Jared From Guns and Gadgets posted something today that got me interested in "researching"

This is from the 1978 State of Hawaii "Constitution Convention" 

https://lrb.hawaii.gov/constitution/#articlei


RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Section 17.  A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

Hmmm...Yet the State of Hawaii "INFRINGES" on our rights?

Wow

Aloha!

Yes, I did know and I do care.  The state of hawaii also have their elected officials take an oath of office whereby they pledge to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States.

In it's entirety.  Not just parts that they like.

So in my opinion the question is:  Do they care?  Apparently they do not.

No wonder everyone is moving away.

Each year that goes by I wonder if they'll try to remove it.  I'm amazed it's still there.

Most likely the legislators don't know it's there.

I learned about Hawaii's State Constitution for about a day in High School. It was right after we glossed over the Overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy and breezed through the Republic of Hawaii.

In high school It's interesting how Guns are literally what changed Hawaii history.

King Kamehameha used guns to unite the islands.

King Kalakaua was held at gunpoint to sign away his royal authority (Bayonet Constitution)

Queen Liliuokalani, was overthrown by merchants with the aid of US Marines & USS Boston (boat with a bigger gun), you know to protect American Interests.

And when the royalists tried to reclaim their monarchy, their plan was foiled, guns were confiscated and the Queen was forced to abdicate in order to save her people.

So I guess "disarmament" is kinda deep rooted in Hawaiian history
 

I learned about Hawaii's State Constitution for about a day in High School. It was right after we glossed over the Overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy and breezed through the Republic of Hawaii.

In high school It's interesting how Guns are literally what changed Hawaii history.

King Kamehameha used guns to unite the islands.

King Kalakaua was held at gunpoint to sign away his royal authority (Bayonet Constitution)

Queen Liliuokalani, was overthrown by merchants with the aid of US Marines & USS Boston (boat with a bigger gun), you know to protect American Interests.

And when the royalists tried to reclaim their monarchy, their plan was foiled, guns were confiscated and the Queen was forced to abdicate in order to save her people.

So I guess "disarmament" is kinda deep rooted in Hawaiian history

The queen refused to open the armory because she thought that the land grab was ridiculously illegal and she didn't want to shed blood on something that could be easily worked out diplomatically.

That's not how power works, though. The lack of resistance was taken as a sign that the people were sick of the monarchy (which was actually the case for a large percentage of the population) and legal exceptions were made.

Still it makes one wonder what the outcome might have been if there was a rifle in every home instead of locked up in an armory.

The queen refused to open the armory because she thought that the land grab was ridiculously illegal and she didn't want to shed blood on something that could be easily worked out diplomatically.

That's not how power works, though. The lack of resistance was taken as a sign that the people were sick of the monarchy (which was actually the case for a large percentage of the population) and legal exceptions were made.

Still it makes one wonder what the outcome might have been if there was a rifle in every home instead of locked up in an armory.

At least from how I learned it from High School I thought the Queen's response was weak. Maybe it was the naïve belief that, the US would do the right thing and give her back her kingdom. 

In my view, even if their were bloodshed and martyrs for the Kingdom of Hawaii, maybe the merchants would rethink their actions, much less the US for assisting in the coup of another country.

But that is another reality for the multi-verse theory. That somewhere in another timeline, the Kingdom of Hawaii exists.

 

At least from how I learned it from High School I thought the Queen's response was weak. Maybe it was the naïve belief that, the US would do the right thing and give her back her kingdom. 

In my view, even if their were bloodshed and martyrs for the Kingdom of Hawaii, maybe the merchants would rethink their actions, much less the US for assisting in the coup of another country.

But that is another reality for the multi-verse theory. That somewhere in another timeline, the Kingdom of Hawaii exists.

From the American perspective it’s easy to roll our eyes at the sovereignty movement and say “get over it already” but by not taking an impartial look at the facts we are missing out on an extremely valuable historical lesson. When powerful people want something it doesn’t matter what the contracts and law books say. There is a window where resistance is useful but once it’s closed then you’re stuck playing by someone else’s rules, probably for at least a few more decades.

Hawaii State constitution also says that the U.S Constitution is adopted in its entirety.
Right after the Preamble.
How's that working out for us?

Each year that goes by I wonder if they'll try to remove it.  I'm amazed it's still there.

Most likely the legislators don't know it's there.

It really wouldn't matter if they did, at least not unless it was removed from the US Constitution.

Jared From Guns and Gadgets posted something today that got me interested in "researching"

This is from the 1978 State of Hawaii "Constitution Convention" 

https://lrb.hawaii.gov/constitution/#articlei


RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Section 17.  A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

Hmmm...Yet the State of Hawaii "INFRINGES" on our rights?

Wow

Aloha!

Yup, only a single word difference from the US constitution too.

Hawaii has been very liberal in his they are defining infringe...

I learned about Hawaii's State Constitution for about a day in High School. It was right after we glossed over the Overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy and breezed through the Republic of Hawaii.

In high school It's interesting how Guns are literally what changed Hawaii history.

King Kamehameha used guns to unite the islands.

King Kalakaua was held at gunpoint to sign away his royal authority (Bayonet Constitution)

Queen Liliuokalani, was overthrown by merchants with the aid of US Marines & USS Boston (boat with a bigger gun), you know to protect American Interests.

And when the royalists tried to reclaim their monarchy, their plan was foiled, guns were confiscated and the Queen was forced to abdicate in order to save her people.

So I guess "disarmament" is kinda deep rooted in Hawaiian history

First thing Kamehameha did was disarm the remaining Chiefs; he knew the power of firearms and did not want threats to the newly conquered united kingdom.

King Lunalilo decommissioned the Hawaiian military after an attempted coup, leaving only the royal guard to protect the monarch.

Following the election of Kalākaua, aka the Hawaiian version of the stolen election, foreign troops were landed to assist in quelling the riot that occurred when Queen Emma lost.

King Kalākaua was in the process of restoring, expanding and modernizing the Hawaiian military, similar to military expansion by the empire of Japan at the time. Plans were laid to create what was termed the Polynesian Confederacy, but other world powers at the time did not like that idea and it never came to fruition.

There was a failed rebellion following the 1887 constitution (aka the bayonet constitution) by Wilcox; same guy who attempted another failed rebellion in 1895.



With all that happened in Hawaiian history and using these few examples, you'd think it should be easy to correlate the lack of rights for citizens to keep and bear arms to protect the kingdom as a major reason why we lost our sovereignty. However, common sense and historical facts are often drowned out by the misinformation and nonsense promoted by the indoctrinated and the charlatans, who unfortunately control the education system.

Yes, I did know and I do care.  The state of hawaii also have their elected officials take an oath of office whereby they pledge to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States.

In it's entirety.  Not just parts that they like.

So in my opinion the question is:  Do they care?  Apparently they do not.

I never met a Democrat that cared about anybody's rights.  All they care about is their own
wants and beliefs.
 

Yup, only a single word difference from the US constitution too.

Hawaii has been very liberal in his they are defining infringe...

Just curious… what word is different?  I’m not seeing it.

I love getting the last word in.
I'm never sure if I'm being ignored or profound.
As I'm a humble man,  I assume I'm being ignored.
But "katharsis," is good for the soul.
 

Just curious… what word is different?  I’m not seeing it.

I did not see a difference either.

I did not see a difference either.

The only difference between the text of the 2nd Amendment and Hawaii's Bill of Rights Section 17 is capitalization and punctuation.

I guess capitalizing "Militia", "State" and "Arms" means there are 3 different words -- in a purely syntactical sense.

Perhaps the omission of commas creates a certain nuance that only the truly objective among us can discern.