11-16-2018, 1:27 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: North Idaho (formerly Bay Area)
Posts: 1,108
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill
Their response is essentially:
1) The (3 judge) Panel Badly Misconstrued Hawaii’s Open-Carry Law.
The open carry licenses are not limited to "Security Guards", despite the fact that nobody but security guards have been issued open carry licenses.
2) The Panel’s Decision Splits From The Decisions Of At Least Four Circuits.
Other circuits have determined that the open carry is not the core of the 2A, so it doesn't jive with what everyone else has said.
3) The (3 judge) Panel Flouted The EnBanc Court’s Decision In Peruta.
They claim that Peruta indicated the there is no right to bear outside the home, which is a mischaracterization of what Peruta actually said.
4) This Issue Is Profoundly Important.
It is super-duper important for public safety to keep firearms off the streets, so, you have to reverse the 3 judge panels decision.
That about covers it.
|
Perfect. Thanks!
__________________
|