I've read the wording of HRS §134-9  Licenses to carry[/b][/font]  about concealed permits: "in exceptional circumstances" "when one has reason to fear for life or property" "May issue, for one year" and I have a few questions.
Are there any attorneys on this board?  Has there ever been a challenge to this law?  Has anyone successfully filed a "Sunshine Law" request for a list of all permit holders in Hawaii? 


That seems the logical approach to changing Hawaii from 'may issue' to 'shall issue'.  I'd bet that the list of permit holders is littered with blatant corruption (Friends with the Chief? Permit! Politically connected?  Permit!  Big donor?  Permit!)
If one could demonstrate that the permits are issued without 'exceptional' need to friends, etc, then one could challenge the law as being unequally applied and is disenfranchising the public.


Another way would be sue that the current 'may issue' system is an unconstitutional infringement of the 2A right to 'bear' arms.  Hawaii law allows you to 'keep' arms, but 'bearing' them (unless you're one of the Ali'i) is a Class A felony.


Thoughts?  Comments?

I like your thinking on this.  The problem is finding a lawyer, or someone with deep enough pockets to pay for a lawyer to take on this issue. 

I agree with Antithesis.

Without deep pockets, our best bet is to go through the legislative change process.

Also, with the ruling in McDonald today, there will be more changes and constitutionality changes to come. From what I can understand, decisions in the 9th District Court of Supreme Court could affect the laws here.

Make no mistake, momentum is rolling in gun owners' favor and there is a lot we can accomplish.  However I think the CC issue will probably be one of the toughest and most controversial laws for us to tackle.  I think of it like the boss fight in any movie or video game; we've still got a lot of cronies and henchmen to bang out first before we have the strength to properly take it on. 

I've read the wording of HRS §134-9  Licenses to carry  about concealed permits: "in exceptional circumstances" "when one has reason to fear for life or property" "May issue, for one year" and I have a few questions.
Are there any attorneys on this board?  Has there ever been a challenge to this law?  Has anyone successfully filed a "Sunshine Law" request for a list of all permit holders in Hawaii? 

That seems the logical approach to changing Hawaii from 'may issue' to 'shall issue'.  I'd bet that the list of permit holders is littered with blatant corruption (Friends with the Chief? Permit! Politically connected?  Permit!  Big donor?  Permit!)
If one could demonstrate that the permits are issued without 'exceptional' need to friends, etc, then one could challenge the law as being unequally applied and is disenfranchising the public.


Another way would be sue that the current 'may issue' system is an unconstitutional infringement of the 2A right to 'bear' arms.  Hawaii law allows you to 'keep' arms, but 'bearing' them (unless you're one of the Ali'i) is a Class A felony.


Thoughts?  Comments?

In some of the previous discussions here about the subject, it appears that information about gun permits may not be subject to FOIA requests. That means that we probably cannot get names of folks who weere issued concealed carry permits outside a judicial proceeding.

And while the McDonald decision may affect new cases, previous Hawaii Supreme Court decisions have held that our Article 1, Section 17, which is worded exaclty the same as the Second Amendment, protected only a "collective right" and not an individual right to "keep and bear" arms. And Heller specifically mentioned that "bear" meant carry so there may be room to revisit the case in some judicial action using these arguments. But, that's an expensive and lengthly process. It would probably be more more cost effective to attack it legislatively, possibly using the threat of judicial action based on Heller and McDonald to pursuade the legislators that failure to implement the suggested changes (to "shall issue" ) could incur substantial costs to the state thru judicial proceedings and little chance of the State successfully defending it's position.

Again, I feel compelled to mention that every year a concealed carry bill is introduced but gets no where in the legislaure. Every year "we" get the opportunity to change the law to "our" benefit, but we don't take advantage of that. We could change the law but we just cannot seem to get enough gun owners involved.....

Right, it gets introduced & killed in committee.  The committee decisions are made long before the public 'hearing' and vote (read dog & pony show). 

Fundamentally, it comes down to this: a choice between freedom & slavery.
Hawaii has a long history of slavery, in the form of the old Ali'i system that the state government is founded on.  Hawaii likes to think of itself as democratic, but let's face it, we have the least number of elected officials of any state in the union.  We elect the Governor and the Mayor, who appoint everyone else.  These "Ali'i" provide 'security' and 'welfare' for us commoners, as long as we give up our freedom.  Slaves may not bear arms.  There are lots & lots of people here who wish to be told what to do, every day by their 'leaders', bosses, etc and have a serious case of "don't be the nail sticking out" syndrome. 

we need to become that nail, if we are to succeed.  Just like the civil rights movement, it takes time & money.  Freedom in Hawaii, I think, will not be 'bought' in the legislature.  That would mean allowing us to be truly free, which threatens the system.  The courthouse, is IMO, the only place we can win this contest.  The law is the constitutional or not, regardless of what the legislature wants it to be.   

Right, it gets introduced & killed in committee.  The committee decisions are made long before the public 'hearing' and vote (read dog & pony show). 

Fundamentally, it comes down to this: a choice between freedom & slavery.
Hawaii has a long history of slavery, in the form of the old Ali'i system that the state government is founded on.  Hawaii likes to think of itself as democratic, but let's face it, we have the least number of elected officials of any state in the union.  We elect the Governor and the Mayor, who appoint everyone else.  These "Ali'i" provide 'security' and 'welfare' for us commoners, as long as we give up our freedom.  Slaves may not bear arms.  There are lots & lots of people here who wish to be told what to do, every day by their 'leaders', bosses, etc and have a serious case of "don't be the nail sticking out" syndrome. 

we need to become that nail, if we are to succeed.  Just like the civil rights movement, it takes time & money.  Freedom in Hawaii, I think, will not be 'bought' in the legislature.  That would mean allowing us to be truly free, which threatens the system.  The courthouse, is IMO, the only place we can win this contest.  The law is the constitutional or not, regardless of what the legislature wants it to be.   

I would respectfully disagree that the courts are the only means that we have at our disposal for changing the laws....that doesn't mean that certain laws may be challenged in court, just that change via the legislative process is faster (theoretically) and cheaper. Add to the issue the ability to get a well qualified lawyer with necessary background in firearms law to take the case(s) determined to most beneficial, and I think the legislative route becomes even more attractive.

Unfortunately, the other side of that coin is that we, as gun owners and Second Amendment advocates, have not been able to generate enough participation to effectively force the legislators to back our bills. And when they ignore us, there is no consequenses as they just get re-elected. But whoose fault is that?

HiCarry,

I have some experience working with the legislature.  I guess that colors my opinion.  Have you ever heard of Minnie Fukuda?

I think Alohachris hit the nail on the head with regards to the general attitude of the populace, but i disagree with the rest. You can tie this up in court for the next 30 years and get nowhere....just like the previous 30 years. The NRA has been around just as long "fighting" the laws, and we're still in the same place on the merry go round. We need some type of radical new threat to bring back the belief in our constitution, like unstoppable roving bands of brigands and outlaws or a red dawn invasion, but until that happens the majority will always look upon us "gun nuts" as weirdos and kooks.

I'm not trying to discourage any measure that we come up with to protest the laws and change them, I'm ready and willing to help, but our government, state or federal, isn't going to just hand over freedoms that are a direct threat to it. I guess it's like triage, we need to start picking our battles. We did win two recently, with the passing of SB 358 and 532, and those were two small victories that didn't even receive much attention. We need more of those small victories, because if we go for the hail mary, mother of all concealed carry open carry touchdown plays, every anti-gun group in America is gonna try and crush it, maybe even add more laws and regulations.

All this Blah Blah and I forgot what my point was.... I guess maybe it's, Hawaii is great to visit, but move to Montana or someplace where people actually value and understand what America and the constitution and bill of rights is about. 

HiCarry,

I have some experience working with the legislature.  I guess that colors my opinion.  Have you ever heard of Minnie Fukuda?

I too have some experience "working" with our esteemed elected officials over the years. However, despite the fact that I probably hold similar reservations about the process as you do, I refuse to believe that we, as an organized, vocal and collaborative group cannot get things changed.

But, we first have to get everyone involved. And that, IMHO, is where we fail miserably. When I speak to neophyte gun students almost all are in favor of various "reforms" to Hawaii's gun laws. When I participate in discussions here and in other forums, gun owners are for the most part enthusiastic about geeting laws changed. Add to that the increase in gun ownership (37% increase in gun registrations this year; 195% increase in the last decade) in Hawaii and it would seem that getting these individuals to participate would be relatively easy. But, that is not the case. And, until we can actively recruit all those silent gun owners to participate, it will be more of a struggle in than it should be in the legislature. But the Courts are notoriously slow too....the difference is that we can influence the Legislature, not so much the Courts.

I like your thinking on this.  The problem is finding a lawyer, or someone with deep enough pockets to pay for a lawyer to take on this issue.

First of all, hello! Had some problems finding this site initially, but I've spent about five years now in Hawaii.

Alright so, I am going to write to the NRA-CDF ( https://www.nradefensefund.org/requesting_help.aspx) and contact them to ask if they would be willing to fund any litigation here in Hawaii. While I don't believe that they will even fund a court case here, I also figured, like my mom has told me, the worst they can say is no thanks.   Has anyone been in contact, have contact or know someone that would be able to provide the following information. ( I can't seem to find any constitutional lawyers here). Information I'm looking for is as follows, in bold:

Projected costs of litigation for the different stages of the case and an explanation of the basis for such projected costs, including hourly attorney fees and projected number of hours;
Probability of obtaining an award of attorney's fees and costs should this applicant prevail in the litigation. This would mostly be based on 42 U.S.C. 1983, very similar to the previous law suit, but that claim was rejected since it was not an individual right (which it is now).

There really seems to be a lack of lawyers willing to take this on. Also considered was a letter to some of the instructors at Hawaii Richardson. It's possible that some of the senior law students might be willing to give this a shot (was just another idea). That being said, most people probably don't have the funds to fight this case. One could always go pro se, which lowers the doubt required, but yeah who knows how that would turn out.

HiCarry,

I have some experience working with the legislature.  I guess that colors my opinion.  Have you ever heard of Minnie Fukuda?

No

Quote from: Antithesis on June 28, 2010, 12:03:50 PM

I like your thinking on this.  The problem is finding a lawyer, or someone with deep enough pockets to pay for a lawyer to take on this issue.

First of all, hello! Had some problems finding this site initially, but I've spent about five years now in Hawaii.

Alright so, I am going to write to the NRA-CDF ( https://www.nradefensefund.org/requesting_help.aspx) and contact them to ask if they would be willing to fund any litigation here in Hawaii. While I don't believe that they will even fund a court case here, I also figured, like my mom has told me, the worst they can say is no thanks.   Has anyone been in contact, have contact or know someone that would be able to provide the following information. ( I can't seem to find any constitutional lawyers here). Information I'm looking for is as follows, in bold:

Projected costs of litigation for the different stages of the case and an explanation of the basis for such projected costs, including hourly attorney fees and projected number of hours;
Probability of obtaining an award of attorney's fees and costs should this applicant prevail in the litigation. This would mostly be based on 42 U.S.C. 1983, very similar to the previous law suit, but that claim was rejected since it was not an individual right (which it is now).

There really seems to be a lack of lawyers willing to take this on. Also considered was a letter to some of the instructors at Hawaii Richardson. It's possible that some of the senior law students might be willing to give this a shot (was just another idea). That being said, most people probably don't have the funds to fight this case. One could always go pro se, which lowers the doubt required, but yeah who knows how that would turn out.

First, welcome.

While I think that given the current circumstances that it would be possible to build a case, as you note it would be difficult for many reasons, including cost. I don't think the NRA is going to get involved, especially with other 2A cases around the nation percolating....As for going Pro Se, I think it would be a HUGE mistake. The case of the George Young on the Big Island representing himself on a constitutional challenge to his denial of a concealed carry permit is a prime example. He got shut down almost immediately and established bad precedent for any subsequent CCW cases to overcome. Now, in light of Heller and McDonald, that precedent may be easier to overcome, but it is precedent none the less.

I remain convinced that legislative action is the key at this point in time, unless someone has a very rich uncle willing to foot the bill for what would certainly be a very expensive legal challenge. As for the award of attorney's fees on completion of a successful challenge, I suggest you research Gura's attempts to get paid by DC on the costs he incurred in Heller.

First of all, hello! Had some problems finding this site initially, but I've spent about five years now in Hawaii.

Welcome, Funtimes.
Can I ask, how did you find the site and what problems do you have.

I agree with HiCarry that legislative action is the easiest way to affect change without dumping a whole bunch of money at it. And with so many suites filed nationally with top attorneys on each, it is probably better to wait on their outcomes as opposed to putting forth a "half-assed" effort in the court.

Welcome, Funtimes.
Can I ask, how did you find the site and what problems do you have.

I agree with HiCarry that legislative action is the easiest way to affect change without dumping a whole bunch of money at it. And with so many suites filed nationally with top attorneys on each, it is probably better to wait on their outcomes as opposed to putting forth a "half-assed" effort in the court.

 
 Not sure if it keywords for the search engines, traffic not high enough ect. It's just for most of the terms I put in didn't bring up the forum "Hawaii guns", "Hawaii gun forums", "hawaii second amendment" retrieved no results to this site, at least not on the first page of google.  As to how I found 2a, I was shown this site by a friend. Had he of not shown me, I probably would have not found it.

Ah, I thought there might have been more technical issues. Well, glad to have you here and always happy to have friends tell their friends.

Just thought I would put some hope out there. I have a good friend / brother of mine, who has decided to represent me in court. We are currently developing some strategies and also waiting for the approval or denial of my CCW letter (a.k.a the application for the application) to determine how / what specific time we want to proceed.

Just checked up on my letter!

	Delivered, August 06, 2010, 10:19 am, HONOLULU, HI 96813
	Acceptance, August 05, 2010, 2:27 pm, KAILUA, HI 96734

This way there is no disputing the receipt of it.

Good job Funtimes. Can I ask, how did you word that letter?
Thanks
B

Louis M. Kealoha
Chief of Police
Honolulu Police Department
801 South Beretania Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

Dear Chief of Police:
This letter is a request for a permit to carry in accordance with Honolulu Revised Statute §134-9 Licenses to carry. In this letter I will express to you my qualifications, suitability, and need to carry based on fear of injury to my persons or property.
1.) General Background - I am a twenty-six year old male, American born citizen, who is currently serving in the United States Navy. I am also employed as a process server by Process Servers Exclusive LLC, in which I am licensed to do so by the State of Hawaii. Being married now for 4 1/2 years, I am stable with a family.

2.) Demonstration of Morale Character - As an active citizen, I am registered to and meet all requirements to vote in my home state. Possessing no prior convictions, nor any pending convictions, I have a free and clear record of no criminal history. I am a member of various local and national organizations, whom consistently demonstrate their dedication to society, most notably the Honolulu Freemasons and National Rifle Association. Additionally, I volunteer my time and effort to assist HPD's Law Enforcement Explorer Program by taking steps to construct the up and coming advisory board for the program. Finally, by volunteering time to the Keiki Identification Program and the PADI diving associations, project aware, a coral reef cleanup and protection program, I am able to develop and promote a cleaner and safer community around us all.

3.) Qualifications to Possess and Carry - I have met all the training requirements of §134-2 Permits to acquire. As Submariner in the U.S. Navy, I have assisted with countless sessions of force protection training by acting as a line coach and firearms assistant on live firearm ranges. Having received tactical training, which covered the use of small arms in high stress situations, achieving medals from the Navy for Expert Pistol Marksman, and also receiving the Naval Auxiliary Security Forces 'Top Gun' award, I am highly trained in the use of small arms.

4.) Reasons for Request. - As a licensed process server, I am consistently put into positions that have varying scales of danger and harm, many of which could escalate quickly and become life threatening. Very few people, if any, are ever happy to see a person serving process. This job, even by many HPD Officers statements, is dangerous -- and is only getting worse. While serving process I am not afforded an option of backup partner, nor the common tools for self defense that many agencies across this country are allowed to legally employ; and many times, and even a reliable cellular reception that could assist me in an emergency while executing my duties as a process server is non-existent. 
I have been threatened in front of HPD officers, by those being served. Threats of "I will find you Haole, I will find where you live, something might happen when you come back out here'' are just the beginning some of the threats, all of which I take serious. However, they are commonly not this polite and usually contain many expletives, gestures, and likely consist of intimidating approaches by defendants threatening to fight or inflict bodily harm. Many of these approaching threats are men, whom are twice my size. Threats to my family, my property, and myself leave me in a constant state of heightened stress and fear. I remain terrified thinking about the presence of a chance a person attacking, or even shooting at me while serving process in the outer edges of Kaneohe and Waimanalo; and I am left questioning what I would be able to do fend against it.
I have been attacked by dogs. Luckily, I have been able to shield myself, though every person knows, luck always runs out and I will get bitten sooner or later. My wife has been threatened and approached while serving process, as a defendant approached the vehicle to pull her out of it, myself being unarmed, would have been helpless to prevent her assault. Police Officers, while performing my same duties, are afforded numerous layers of protection. They are authorized to utilize extendable batons, higher grade oleoresin capsicum sprays, tazers, and lastly -- a firearm. This is all in addition to the usage of a badge and backup. HPD officers do not serve process alone. This need for your officers to have backup clearly demonstrates the probability of violence, injury, assault, or worse.
Based on the previously mentioned information, I am therefore requesting that you issue a permit to carry, whereby in a case of extreme emergency, I am afforded the opportunity to defend myself from impending danger or serious bodily harm. I wish to exercise my constitutional right, the right to carry, as per the Second amendment of the United States Constitution.

Sincerely,

(removed my name and address)

Well good luck. That is a very nicely worded letter and you clearly show everything HPD should need.