Heller aftermath: Hawaii will review laws

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is actually the statute that needs to be challenged:


[§134-25] Place to keep pistol or revolver; penalty. (a) Except as provided in sections 134-5 and 134-9, all firearms shall be confined to the possessor's place of business, residence, or sojourn; provided that it shall be lawful to carry unloaded firearms in an enclosed container from the place of purchase to the purchaser's place of business, residence, or sojourn, or between these places upon change of place of business, residence, or sojourn, or between these places and the following:

(1) A place of repair;

(2) A target range;

(3) A licensed dealer's place of business;

(4) An organized, scheduled firearms show or exhibit;

(5) A place of formal hunter or firearm use training or instruction; or

(6) A police station.

"Enclosed container" means a rigidly constructed receptacle, or a commercially manufactured gun case, or the equivalent thereof that completely encloses the firearm.

(b) Any person violating this section by carrying or possessing a loaded or unloaded pistol or revolver shall be guilty of a class B felony. [L 2006, c 66, pt of §1]


You know, I can't find State v. Mendoza.
 
Even adamantly anti-gun legislators should eventually realize that they shoot themselves in the foot by dragging it until there are direct challenges. The stupidest of them are likely to see that direct challenges open the door to all kinds of nightmares that they fear. Instead of mitigating the damage they invite its increase beyond even their imaginations.

When the dust finally settles about Heller and its aftermath, for example, it's likely that Adrian Fenty will be seen to have done more for the Second Amendment rights of Americans than even Dick Heller and his attorneys. If it were not for Fenty's arrogance, pigheadedness, and limited capacity to understand the case and the subject matter there would have been no DC v Heller and only a relatively limited local victory.

Fenty did it for us. And because Fenty still doesn't understand the dynamics of the situation, he had made it possible for us to expand the victory. Fenty's public declaration that semi-automatic handguns are machineguns and that they will continue to be banned in DC makes it immediately possible to topple at least a few more barriers that otherwise would have required years of hard work.
 
As a Hawaii gun owner, firearms instructor, and someone familar with the nearly yearly effort to get concealed carry passed, I can say rather confidently that any review by AG Bennett will just "confirm" that the current laws regarding firearms are "reasonable" and would pass constitutional scrutiny...I believe that he has even been quoted as saying something to that effect, but I cannot locate that reference.
As far as concealed carry is concerned, I believe there were none issued in 2007, and maybe 1-2 the year before. In any event, getting a concealed carry permit is definitely an unusual occurence, and one reserved for only the most politically connected.
 
To the best of my knowledge, the only guy lucky enough to have a concealed carry permit is the one who supplies the weapons to the police force.
 
I have heard that only 2 have ever been issued. One to the police armorer and the other to the chief's sister which caused a big stink and was turned in.

Hawaii is one of the worst gun rights states in the nation. I'd love to see them choke on the Heller ruling. :fire:
 
Dr. Max Cooper is the President of the Hawaii Rifle Association, and is no stranger to the editorial section (he also campaigned against the .50 BMG ban the HPD Chief was trying to push through). Although the laws are strict here, at least there are no outright bans of handguns or AWB-style restrictions on rifles. There were a number of high-profile murders and assaults here recently that should highlight the need for individuals to be allowed use of all the tools necessary to defend themselves and others.
Dr. Cooper is not the current president of HRA; it is Harvey Gerwing. Dr. Cooper is still actively involved in both HRA and it's associated PAC.

Hopefully the next legislative session we can use some of the "high profile" incidents you mention to our advantage. If you are not already a member of HRA, we could use all the help we can get.
 
State v. Mendoza, for your reading pleasure

Note that Mr. Mendoza was popped on a misdemeanor charge. I'd also look at the fact that they viewed this as an individual right, though subject to restriction.

The other thing to think about is that the Heller ruling is directly applicable to Hawaii due to the exact phrasing and wording of Article 1, Section 17. Some of the statements about "bearing arms" by the members of the constitutional convention may not be specifically applicable.
 

Attachments

  • State v Mendoza Hawaii Supreme Court 1996.pdf
    66.5 KB · Views: 1
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top