https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2025/05/20/alleged-waikiki-stabbing-leaves-man-hospitalized-serious-condition/

no calls for knife registration.

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2025/05/20/alleged-waikiki-stabbing-leaves-man-hospitalized-serious-condition/

no calls for knife registration.

....
Please notify Jill Tokuda and Chris Marvin.
 Everyclown needs a new press release.

I guess the victim improperly deployed his Spirit of Aloha in that confrontation, or that it malfunctioned somehow, because according to Hawaii Supreme Clown Todd Eddins:

“The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities,”

and

“We hold that in Hawaiʻi there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public … The history of the Hawaii resident Islands does not include a society where armed people move about the community to possibly combat the deadly aims of others,” wrote Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Todd Eddins."

FOAD Mr. Eddins.  Your deranged belief system is an affront to the sanctity of human life.

In 2025, CCW is required for personal safety on Oahu.

This is Germany: Strict gun laws, no CCW - and a holocaust of knife violence daily as a result.  The things shown in the X post below should have been shot on the street on day one of their career as knife-wielding murders, but there they are.

However, since firearms in the hands of citizens are perceived as a direct threat to those who are obsessed with power and control, firearms for self defense will never be permitted - extending all the way to allowing the wanton slaughter of innocents on the streets by imported homicidal pavement apes, as we see in real time here.

This is of course why we relentlessly fight the tyrants seeking to impose this hell on America.

It’s always good to be reminded how correct we are, and the service we do to our country by standing up and fighting these foreign monsters (totalitarians, Marxists, globalists, whatever name you give them) on our soil.

https://x.com/RMXnews/status/1912794353367458066?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1912794353367458066%7Ctwgr%5E9ed2860815cca4c6b0272edc1e6b6b11bc0dc60c%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fwe-have-imported-knife-violence-wave-attacks-shakes-germany-once-again

On the lighter side, they look pretty gay.  Got a real Freddie Mercury thing going on there.

I guess the victim improperly deployed his Spirit of Aloha in that confrontation, or that it malfunctioned somehow, because according to Hawaii Supreme Clown Todd Eddins:

“The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities,”

and

“We hold that in Hawaiʻi there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public … The history of the Hawaii resident Islands does not include a society where armed people move about the community to possibly combat the deadly aims of others,” wrote Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Todd Eddins."

FOAD Mr. Eddins.  Your deranged belief system is an affront to the sanctity of human life.

In 2025, CCW is required for personal safety on Oahu.

From pre-contact (pre-1778) until at least the late 1820s to early 1830s, it was common for Hawaiians to carry weapons; it was a natural part of our society. One of the first things Hawaiians did when they acquired or traded for iron was convert it into daggers, if not directly trade for knives or other weapons.

Laws restricting firearms were officially introduced into written law during the reign of Kauikeauoli, aka Kamehameha III, circa 1834. It banned persons belonging to foreign ships, aka foreigners, from possessing weapons on shore. It wasnʻt until the 1852 Weapons Law that all individuals were restricted from carrying deadly weapons without good cause, which included “any bowie-knife, sword-cane, pistol, air-gun, sling-shot, or other deadly weapon.”

No other Hawaiian Kingdom laws from 1852 to 1893 specifically addressed weapon restrictions or the carrying thereof.

It wasnʻt until after the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom that the Republic of Hawaiʻi and then Territorial Government further restricted the possession and carrying of firearms; specifically: the 1896 "An Act to Regulate the Carrying and Use of Firearms" (which required licensing and registration of firearms), and laws passed during the territorial period, which is the precursor to and looks almost exactly the same as modern HRS 134. The irony is that to support this means you have to support the government that overthrew the Hawaiian Kingdom; a government grossly consisting of individuals who participated in or supported the overthrow, were grossly anti-Hawaiian and anti-Asian and who sought to exploit the resources and people of Hawaiʻi for their own financial gain.

All this "spirit of aloha" nonsense is a modern haole fabrication and is what happens when anti-weapon haoles and Hawaiians cherry pick our culture and history to suit their political agendas. It is not truly rooted in the historical Hawaiian identity or the history of the Hawaiian people; at least not until we were westernized and christianized, which historically had more to do with governments subjugating and controlling populations in other parts of the world.

From pre-contact (pre-1778) until at least the late 1820s to early 1830s, it was common for Hawaiians to carry weapons; it was a natural part of our society. One of the first things Hawaiians did when they acquired or traded for iron was convert it into daggers, if not directly trade for knives or other weapons.

Laws restricting firearms were officially introduced into written law during the reign of Kauikeauoli, aka Kamehameha III, circa 1834. It banned persons belonging to foreign ships, aka foreigners, from possessing weapons on shore. It wasnʻt until the 1852 Weapons Law that all individuals were restricted from carrying deadly weapons without good cause, which included “any bowie-knife, sword-cane, pistol, air-gun, sling-shot, or other deadly weapon.”

No other Hawaiian Kingdom laws from 1852 to 1893 specifically addressed weapon restrictions or the carrying thereof.

It wasnʻt until after the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom that the Republic of Hawaiʻi and then Territorial Government further restricted the possession and carrying of firearms; specifically: the 1896 "An Act to Regulate the Carrying and Use of Firearms" (which required licensing and registration of firearms), and laws passed during the territorial period, which is the precursor to and looks almost exactly the same as modern HRS 134. The irony is that to support this means you have to support the government that overthrew the Hawaiian Kingdom; a government grossly consisting of individuals who participated in or supported the overthrow, were grossly anti-Hawaiian and anti-Asian and who sought to exploit the resources and people of Hawaiʻi for their own financial gain.

All this "spirit of aloha" nonsense is a modern haole fabrication and is what happens when anti-weapon haoles and Hawaiians cherry pick our culture and history to suit their political agendas. It is not truly rooted in the historical Hawaiian identity or the history of the Hawaiian people; at least not until we were westernized and christianized, which historically had more to do with governments subjugating and controlling populations in other parts of the world.

Thank you for this post!

I learned much from it - all the best to you brother!

The reason a ban on knives have not been introduced yet is because they, meaning the legislature, need to come up with

a definition or description of what will constitute an assault knife.  Maybe like a knife having two or more of the following features.

A sharp edge, a handle, overall length more than 6 inches, a pointed tip, black in color, etc.

From pre-contact (pre-1778) until at least the late 1820s to early 1830s, it was common for Hawaiians to carry weapons; it was a natural part of our society. One of the first things Hawaiians did when they acquired or traded for iron was convert it into daggers, if not directly trade for knives or other weapons.

Laws restricting firearms were officially introduced into written law during the reign of Kauikeauoli, aka Kamehameha III, circa 1834. It banned persons belonging to foreign ships, aka foreigners, from possessing weapons on shore. It wasnʻt until the 1852 Weapons Law that all individuals were restricted from carrying deadly weapons without good cause, which included “any bowie-knife, sword-cane, pistol, air-gun, sling-shot, or other deadly weapon.”

No other Hawaiian Kingdom laws from 1852 to 1893 specifically addressed weapon restrictions or the carrying thereof.

It wasnʻt until after the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom that the Republic of Hawaiʻi and then Territorial Government further restricted the possession and carrying of firearms; specifically: the 1896 "An Act to Regulate the Carrying and Use of Firearms" (which required licensing and registration of firearms), and laws passed during the territorial period, which is the precursor to and looks almost exactly the same as modern HRS 134. The irony is that to support this means you have to support the government that overthrew the Hawaiian Kingdom; a government grossly consisting of individuals who participated in or supported the overthrow, were grossly anti-Hawaiian and anti-Asian and who sought to exploit the resources and people of Hawaiʻi for their own financial gain.

All this "spirit of aloha" nonsense is a modern haole fabrication and is what happens when anti-weapon haoles and Hawaiians cherry pick our culture and history to suit their political agendas. It is not truly rooted in the historical Hawaiian identity or the history of the Hawaiian people; at least not until we were westernized and christianized, which historically had more to do with governments subjugating and controlling populations in other parts of the world.

The state tried to use this to defend their lawsuits.  But it shouldn't even be considred as HI wasn't a territory or state yet. It would be like trying to justify gun control when England ran things.

This shows that the anti 2a has no "history and tradition" and are throwing what ever they can at the wall to see what sticks.  Then a corrupt judge uses this as justification to uphold anti 2a laws.

The state tried to use this to defend their lawsuits.  But it shouldn't even be considred as HI wasn't a territory or state yet. It would be like trying to justify gun control when England ran things.

This shows that the anti 2a has no "history and tradition" and are throwing what ever they can at the wall to see what sticks.  Then a corrupt judge uses this as justification to uphold anti 2a laws.

Yes, it’s Kafkaesque.

These are extremely dangerous people.  That’s why they so strongly motivate the sane (mostly), and moral, to arm themselves.

"Their" version of a democratic society is:

We're armed.

And you're not.