It's probably an unpopular opinion here, but I actually agree with the guy...
I don't think a permit should be required for any long gun (AR to shotgun to musket) unless you want to carry it in public.
I think a permit should be required to own a handgun, and if you want to carry it in public, you also should have a permit demonstrating you have the skills necessary to carry and deploy that firearm safely.
My reasoning for this is simply because long guns are rarely used in crimes and cannot really be concealed. In situations where a long gun is used, you can usually take your time (e.g. hunting or skeet shooting) and there probably aren't a lot of people around. However, when you carry a handgun, we need to make sure you don't have a criminal history since gun crimes are usually committed with handguns. In addition, carrying a concealed handgun requires skills that people don't naturally have. People fumble holstering/unholstering a weapon in giant outside-the-waistband holsters... I think people should be required to demonstrate they can remove a layer of clothing and deploy a concealed weapon without injuring themselves or someone else. Also, since CCWing means you'll be carrying in public, there are a lot of people around who could be hurt. I see police who have "training" running, one-handed, indiscriminately firing at a target 20-30 yards away at an obviously unclear backdrop. It's troubling to think what someone who has absolutely no training will do. In exchange for this training though, the state shouldn't have such a wide "Sensitive Place" ban when police officers are allowed to carry in those same places while off duty, and their tactic of trying to shame Pro2A property owners by requiring placement of signage saying "GUNS ALLOWED" is ridiculous.
Just my 2 cents
It's OK to have a different opinion. But others don't have to like it.
Here's a question to think about. I've taken a CCW test in NV and it's so easy that anyone can pass it. Even someone who just bough their gun. So how difficult should a test be made? I'm not an expert shooter, but passed HI's CCW with a 100% for both guns. What if HPD required a much more difficult test that required to hit a baseball size target at 25 yards under time? I can see that 99% of people would fail this, and those who did pass would have spend many hours and a lot of money practicing. This is why I'm against test or classes. So what good is a class/test that it's very difficult to fail?
Then add in what if the range is shut down? Oahu is lucky that 808GC is the only place allowing private instructors. With KHSC bay's closed and X-Ring only allowing their instructors, if 808GC decided to follow, then it would make the task even more unobtainable. This is another reason why I'm against classes. We saw with COVID when HI shut down the range, no one could buy a handgun. Then with the BS RSVP HPD system, it was almost impossible to get a RSVP for a year, unless you sat at your computer all day hitting the refresh button or you got lucky.
Even with the bays open, there's somethign about only non-profits allowed to use them. Which would still mean no private instructor can do the shooting qual there. And say they can, it would be at open shoots, which doesn't have enough cease fires to change targets out. It's not like NV where you can just go into the desert to shoot.
Then ask yourself, does any other right need to have a test taken in order to exercise it?
I'm not here to change your mind, but just give points of thought. I talked to 1 guy who agreed with the class/test, then I reminded him of what happened during covid when he tried to buy a gun. He wasn't able to do so due to the above I mentioned. He immediately changed his mind to say this is BS.