Open carry ruling 2A (Waipahu, Waianae: buying, safer, rapes)

[Army_Guy]

Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident

Exactly. And, unless this ruling gets overturned en banc or by the Supreme Court (fat chance if Kavanaugh gets confirmed), this ruling applies to all states that fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. That includes Hawaii--the state that was sued--and a good handful of other states. Simply put, Hawaii and other states with similarly strict anti gun laws (no concealed carry or open carry permits) would be forced to issue at least one type of permit.

That's what basically happened in IL years ago.

Mayor Daley, mayor of Chicago at the time, claimed there would be bloodbaths and shootouts all over the place. This is a guy who opposed LEOSA when GWB signed it into law. He didn't even want retired cops to carry. Illinois has had concealed carry for years, it's a lengthy and expensive process, it was designed like that on purpose to dissuade people from getting the permit. Yet it seems 99% of the killings are committed by criminals. Of course, we all know they follow the laws so they can't be carrying...

[prospectheightsresident]

Originally Posted by whtviper1

Before everyone panics about a bunch of open carry guns laws in Hawaii - this still has a ways to go. A sure bet this will get appealed to the full appellate court which has not been very gun friendly. If the full appellate court strikes this down - not very likely the Supreme Court will take it up.

With the current Supreme Court makeup, I'd agree. It only takes four justices to grant cert at the Supreme Court, and Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito are all on record supporting taking 2nd Amendment cases. The thought is that Roberts would continue to be 2nd Amendment friendly, but that he and Kennedy weren't particularly enthused to take on new 2nd Amendment cases. If Kavanaugh gets confirmed as expected, I expect the Supreme Court to take up more 2nd Amendment cases as Kavanaugh has been very vocal about defending 2nd Amendment rights at the court of appeals level.

Still, as you write, there is still a ways to go most likely. Even if this is appealed to the "full" 9th Circuit, its important to know that the "full" 9th Circuit isn't actually the full court. Due to the extreme size composition of the 9th, en banc panels are still only a fraction of the court's full active duty membership; there are 29 active judges on the 9th circuit, but en banc panels consist of 11 judges only. Given that 7 judges on the 9th Circuit were appointed by either Bush 43 or Trump, its entirely possible, though not likely, that the randomly drawn en banc panel would be favorable to upholding 2nd Amendment rights.

[prospectheightsresident]

Originally Posted by Army_Guy

That's what basically happened in IL years ago.

Mayor Daley, mayor of Chicago at the time, claimed there would be bloodbaths and shootouts all over the place. This is a guy who opposed LEOSA when GWB signed it into law. He didn't even want retired cops to carry. Illinois has had concealed carry for years, it's a lengthy and expensive process, it was designed like that on purpose to dissuade people from getting the permit. Yet it seems 99% of the killings are committed by criminals. Of course, we all know they follow the laws so they can't be carrying...

Yep. Its mind-boggling to me that the left continues to have such fears, which have been unfounded.

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by Nyfinestbxtf

Considering Hawaii doesn’t issue carry conceal permits, why would anyone think Hawaii will issue open carry permits? This ruling is a big nothingburger for Hawaii. Hawaii will not turn into the O.K. Corral like in all states that do issue conceal carry and open carry permits. Hawaii is safe from being the Wild West like it is in 30 states that do not even require a permit to open carry. I would avoid going into those states if you can.

backwards is as backwards does.

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by Pyramidsurf

Did you read the ruling? Because that is why Hawaii was sued in the first place. Because they don't issue permits. They let you apply for one but don't issue it. The case essentially ruled that it is a constitutional right to carry so Hawaii cannot just keep denying permits.

Hawaii will more than likely request a rehearing with the entire court and the original decision may get reversed. But, I suspect that there may be some hesitation since the risk is the Supreme Court (with a conservative majority and Scalia gone) taking the case and ruling for the entire Nation on the right to carry.

Did he read the ruling, you ask???? .


It's about time that the people prevailed for once, and with our esteemed President appointing Justices to the SC and Judges to the Appeals and District courts, the people will prevail more and more often.

The right to defends oneself is foundational, and is codified in the 2nd Amendment. States have gotten away with denying that foundational civil right for decades, but the tide is turning, and backwards states, such as HI, will have to start toeing the line on behalf of the people they are supposed to serve (not render impotent from whatever criminal violation some misfeasor wants to bring upon them).

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident

With the current Supreme Court makeup, I'd agree. It only takes four justices to grant cert at the Supreme Court, and Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito are all on record supporting taking 2nd Amendment cases. The thought is that Roberts would continue to be 2nd Amendment friendly, but that he and Kennedy weren't particularly enthused to take on new 2nd Amendment cases. If Kavanaugh gets confirmed as expected, I expect the Supreme Court to take up more 2nd Amendment cases as Kavanaugh has been very vocal about defending 2nd Amendment rights at the court of appeals level.

Still, as you write, there is still a ways to go most likely. Even if this is appealed to the "full" 9th Circuit, its important to know that the "full" 9th Circuit isn't actually the full court. Due to the extreme size composition of the 9th, en banc panels are still only a fraction of the court's full active duty membership; there are 29 active judges on the 9th circuit, but en banc panels consist of 11 judges only. Given that 7 judges on the 9th Circuit were appointed by either Bush 43 or Trump, its entirely possible, though not likely, that the randomly drawn en banc panel would be favorable to upholding 2nd Amendment rights.

And that is a hugely-good thing, if it happens.

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident

Yep. Its mind-boggling to me that the left continues to have such fears, which have been unfounded.

I agree, but with one modifier. It isn't fear so much as it is contempt. Contempt for the people and contempt for their ability to defend themselves, rather than be helpless in defense with only a post-mortem token effort to bring the violator to the bar as the only "security" to be had.

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by Nyfinestbxtf

Considering Hawaii doesn’t issue carry conceal permits, why would anyone think Hawaii will issue open carry permits? This ruling is a big nothingburger for Hawaii. Hawaii will not turn into the O.K. Corral like in all states that do issue conceal carry and open carry permits. Hawaii is safe from being the Wild West like it is in 30 states that do not even require a permit to open carry. I would avoid going into those states if you can.

No doubt, but most other people, not so much.

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by Brian_M

Don't mind me...


https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=2814691


That just sorta indicates that CCW permit holders are more law-abiding than LEO/police (by 1:6 when looking at conviction rates ~ not exactly an insignificant ratio). The MOST law abiding group of people to be classified. I kinda thought everyone Wanted law-abiding neighbors?

Yes, you are seeing much of the same mind-numbed, do whatever government tells you to do, mindset in this case as was the case when Florida (which was said to go from the Sunshine State to the Gunshine State) when they adopted "shall issue" CCW laws. Of course, crime dropped, and criminals started going after people fresh off of Int'l flights knowing they would NOT be able to fight back. None of the "OK Corral" BS materialized, and criminals were deterred, sometimes permanently.

But the people against the right to defend oneself with use of arms are not known as deep or clear thinkers, but, rather, reactionary knee-jerkers who are more interested in being baby-sat than in being free.

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Open-D

No doubt, but most other people, not so much.

I agree, the fear of carry conceal and open carry is ridiculous. I lived in states where no permit is needed for open carry and only on a rare instance would I see someone armed. Bottom line is, Hawaii can issue every law abiding citizen a carry permit and a fraction of one percent would carry. It’s a pain in the ass to being armed. The outrage is from the left who despise the Constitution; the outrage is fake. They only wrap themselves in the Constitution when it benefits them, but everything else is outdated and should be ignored. I still think Hawaii will ignore this ruling even if it were ruled by the SCOTUS. They will continue to not issue any kind of carry permits Ignoring your Constitutional right.