Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-13-2022, 6:15 AM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,866
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Hawaii files bill to nullify NYSRPA opinion

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessi...ls/SB2800_.pdf

H/T to Delaware Export at MDShooters

This is about as onerous as you can get. 22 hours training every 6 months (unless you have a permit before July 1, 2022 which is basically no one which would allow annual renewals), you must ALSO carry a taser. It also has numerous arbitrary statutes that may allow them to deny a permit up front:

(2) Appear to be a suitable person to be so licensed;
(3) Not be prohibited under section 134—7 from the
ownership or possession of a firearm; [aad]
(4) Not have been adjudged insane or not appear to be
mentally deranged
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-13-2022, 7:40 AM
9Cal_OC's Avatar
9Cal_OC 9Cal_OC is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: OC
Posts: 4,092
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

What garbage is this…
More infringements…

Training every 6 months? Would it be just a shooting qual like cops
__________________
Freedom isn't free...

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-13-2022, 9:16 AM
Capybara's Avatar
Capybara Capybara is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 12,168
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

So this will drag Hawaii back into court for skirting the upcoming ruling. Even when the state "loses", they win in trampling on their own citizen's legal and human rights, just like California does.
__________________
NRA Certified Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor, Shotgun Instructor and Range Safety Officer

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-13-2022, 9:19 AM
DolphinFan DolphinFan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,591
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I can't wait for this to be shot down
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-13-2022, 9:46 AM
librarian72 librarian72 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 126
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9Cal_OC View Post
What garbage is this…
More infringements…

Training every 6 months? Would it be just a shooting qual like cops
For 22 hours? hmm, maybe if 2-3 competitions would count.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
US Circuit Courts of Appeal have no deadlines; they work on what they want, when they want. The 9th also seems sometimes to Make Stuff Up in their opinions.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-13-2022, 9:47 AM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,866
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

You’d have to think that when a state makes these radical changes right after a Scotus opinion that it’s automatically suspect.
Unfortunately this is the 9th circuit we’re talking about and they may make us take a case all the way back to Scotus to correct them.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-13-2022, 3:00 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 2,860
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Where in the Second Amendment is there any precondition on exercising the right other than being a member of the class "People."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-14-2022, 12:57 PM
dawgcasa dawgcasa is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DolphinFan View Post
I can't wait for this to be shot down
Liberal states like Hawaii will just keep throwing out more … next they’ll write a law that says public places with more than one person per square mile is automatically designated a “sensitive space”. They’ll happily give you a “shall issue” permit that can only be used on a remote mountain top, maybe, as long as you’re hiking alone in the wilderness.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-14-2022, 1:36 PM
lastinline lastinline is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,676
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcasa View Post
Liberal states like Hawaii will just keep throwing out more … next they’ll write a law that says public places with more than one person per square mile is automatically designated a “sensitive space”. They’ll happily give you a “shall issue” permit that can only be used on a remote mountain top, maybe, as long as you’re hiking alone in the wilderness.
The “Great Expansion” of prohibited classes is just around the corner. Imagine that ALL minor traffic infractions, late return of library books (for us older types), and ANY contact with LE being an automatic disbarment to gun ownership. Mental health screenings, interviews of elementary school teachers, credit worthiness, financial history, vaccination history, etc, etc, could all be used, knowing that all of it is a BS delay tactic, that the 9th circus will uphold, loose, go enbanc, and then delay anything that might be picked up by SCOTUS for an eventual, distant hearing.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-14-2022, 6:36 PM
Thoughts Thoughts is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcasa View Post
They’ll happily give you a “shall issue” permit that can only be used on a remote mountain top, maybe, as long as you’re hiking alone in the wilderness.
Parks are one of the more common gun-free zones. I think you are being optimistic. I suspect they'd let you carry in Nevada...
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-14-2022, 7:16 PM
ProfChaos's Avatar
ProfChaos ProfChaos is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Folsom
Posts: 136
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Its like a race to see who can come up with the most asinine laws.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-14-2022, 7:37 PM
M1A Rifleman's Avatar
M1A Rifleman M1A Rifleman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,818
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

New York is doing the same. Passing new requirements to circumvent SCOTUS. NY is claiming everywhere in the city is a sensitive place, so no carry.
__________________
The only thing that is worse than an idiot, is someone who argues with one.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-14-2022, 9:19 PM
butchy_boy's Avatar
butchy_boy butchy_boy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Nashua, NH
Posts: 104
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Can't SCOTUS see what these states are trying and nix it in the opinion? Like wouldn't you wait til after the opinion to try this bs?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-15-2022, 10:32 AM
Franko221 Franko221 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 21
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

My hope is that the Supreme Court can see all of this going on and is forced to address the standard of review generally in the majority opinion. Declaring strict scrutiny as the law of the land would end the vast majority of anti-2A tomfoolery. Unfortunately, I expect to be disappointed once again...
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-15-2022, 11:54 AM
ddestruel ddestruel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 870
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

the legislation being voted on and put forward so early by these various states Far prior to the NYRPA ruling being issued is very interesting. They preemptively are presenting the future playbook that we have all predicted would happen. Anyone's guess how it will play out but my hope would be that it forces the issue in some of the coming SCOTUS rulings.... even more so through providing guidance or narrowing of the paths that courts or legislatures might pursue continued infringement.

trying to avoid sounding like an optimistic nut job guidance on the NY case pointing to outside of the home being included in the right, historical references to open carry having never required training or a fee based permit, denying the two pronged approach.... inserting some sort of strict scrutiny review. Maybe with some luck some sort of language that says if it was legal or common place before you can’t retroactively ban it or legislate it more today. Case in point 10 round magazines

Maybe we’ll get lucky and they simply say “the historical record says that carry of some sort outside of the home with no preconditions was common place and accepted prior to any new legal conditions then the historical record is governing law”. And they toss in some guidance. If a law abiding citizen seeks to own or utilize a weapon in any manner shape or form that has previously been legally available or used for lawful purposes the state may not ban, precondition or burden that right or component/tool?

I can dream
__________________
NRA Life member, multi organization continued donor etc etc etc

Last edited by ddestruel; 02-16-2022 at 11:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-15-2022, 1:05 PM
dawgcasa dawgcasa is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by butchy_boy View Post
Can't SCOTUS see what these states are trying and nix it in the opinion? Like wouldn't you wait til after the opinion to try this bs?
The Supreme Court can’t use a case to answer prayers for relief that haven’t been asked. What they can do is expound upon the scope of the right to bear outside the home and be very explicit and clear on resolving the 14 year train wreck on the standards of review used by lower courts on 2nd amendment cases. This would be to pre-emptively prevent lower courts from using the pretzel logic on new cases that we’ve seen for the past 14 years. If some of these crazy laws pass before the opinion is issued, perhaps they could throw in a few ‘hypothetical’ examples to clarify the boundaries of their ruling on things they would consider facially unconstitutional. Those things wouldn’t prevent hyper liberal states from trying, but could help court challenges against them to move faster and not languish as long through the appeals process.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-15-2022, 1:34 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,203
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I suspect SCOTUS will also force open carry without restrictions like training , permitts, and carrying a stun gun.

So what will happen in Hawaii is everyone will just open carry. Won't that be interesting ?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-15-2022, 9:57 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,196
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I hope that SCOTUS is quite clear that shall issue means just that: if you can pass a background check the government must issue a carry permit. Given the question presented, that is most likely to be issuance of a CCW. Validating universal open carry seems to me, in this day and age, notwithstanding history, a bridge too far. But shall issue also must me "without fulfilling a bunch of preconditions to issuance" that result in, for most applicants, too high a bar to the exercise of their right. For example, all of the voting laws enacted in the south to make it nearly impossible for any blacks to vote were ultimately overturned (although it took an act of Congress to do it, as I recall). Restrictions such as these proposals are intended to implement a bar to anyone other than those already issued permits (cops and security guards), and as such are a carry ban in effect if not in word--just like the Hawaii law up on appeal in Young.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-15-2022, 11:16 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 9,082
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
I hope that SCOTUS is quite clear that shall issue means just that: if you can pass a background check the government must issue a carry permit. Given the question presented, that is most likely to be issuance of a CCW. Validating universal open carry seems to me, in this day and age, notwithstanding history, a bridge too far. But shall issue also must me "without fulfilling a bunch of preconditions to issuance" that result in, for most applicants, too high a bar to the exercise of their right. For example, all of the voting laws enacted in the south to make it nearly impossible for any blacks to vote were ultimately overturned (although it took an act of Congress to do it, as I recall). Restrictions such as these proposals are intended to implement a bar to anyone other than those already issued permits (cops and security guards), and as such are a carry ban in effect if not in word--just like the Hawaii law up on appeal in Young.
I concur with all of the above. My own pet peeve is the equivalent of a "POLL TAX" in order to exercise an enumerated right.

Right now in LA Cnty. Issuance has begun for a very small segment of the population. But excludes any, or all, lower income citizens. Even though they are the ones living in higher crime areas. Where likelihood that a CCW would be needed is higher.

The CCW POLL TAX is north of $500 at MINIMUM.

If any STATE can by law mandate extraneous requirements for exercising a CIVIL RIGHT. That STATE should foot the bill covering the cost of THEIR REQUIREMENTS.

Last edited by pacrat; 02-15-2022 at 11:21 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-16-2022, 11:18 PM
ddestruel ddestruel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 870
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

It’s not a poll tax it’s just straight up a “carry tax”.



On another thought how big can you make the umbrella of slowing down the government ban train

Are gas powered chainsaws, lawnmowers or generators a self defense arm/tool without them now that ca has banned them you have one less tool at your disposal to defend yourself from a fire.

Self defense doesnt just include defense from armed assault, animals or natural conditions create situations that involve selfdefense
__________________
NRA Life member, multi organization continued donor etc etc etc

Last edited by ddestruel; 02-17-2022 at 9:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-19-2022, 6:26 AM
Texasgrillchef Texasgrillchef is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Posts: 16
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

If you noticed there is an OR…

So an NRA basic pistol course still counts.

But I do agree with the rest of the positions. There is no exemption for instructors apparently. Because I teach NRA basic pistol courses.

And once every 6 months. After about 2 years… people would have the class memorized.

If they do exempt instructors… then you would find people becoming NRA firearms instructors.

I don’t think this bill will pass. They are jumping the gun too, because we don’t even know how SCOTUS will write their opinion.

They may limit scrutiny. As well

We all are all jumping the gun until we know what the opinion will say.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-19-2022, 6:30 AM
Texasgrillchef Texasgrillchef is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Posts: 16
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Don’t forget that the Young v Hawaii open carry case is on hold pending the NYSPRA case as well. I wouldn’t be surprised if they write a short opinion for Young v Hawaii as well

Keep in mind too that the magazine ban for NJ is also on hold pending the NYSPRA case as well. This leads me to believe that something will be said limiting scrutiny to strict.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-20-2022, 4:23 AM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,866
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
I concur with all of the above. My own pet peeve is the equivalent of a "POLL TAX" in order to exercise an enumerated right.

Right now in LA Cnty. Issuance has begun for a very small segment of the population. But excludes any, or all, lower income citizens. Even though they are the ones living in higher crime areas. Where likelihood that a CCW would be needed is higher.

The CCW POLL TAX is north of $500 at MINIMUM.

If any STATE can by law mandate extraneous requirements for exercising a CIVIL RIGHT. That STATE should foot the bill covering the cost of THEIR REQUIREMENTS.
The training requirements IMO are the biggest impediment to the license poll tax. They will use the training to insist we need a license because there is no other way to prove you took a class.
Without the training requirement you just have prohibited and non prohibited individuals, something which the police should be able to determine right on the spot.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-20-2022, 6:03 AM
Gryff's Avatar
Gryff Gryff is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 12,252
iTrader: 61 / 98%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProfChaos View Post
Its like a race to see who can come up with the most asinine laws.
Hawaii elected Mazie Hirono as a Senator, so they are definitely going to give California a run for its money in that category.
__________________
My friends and family disavow all knowledge of my existence, let alone my opinions.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-20-2022, 10:32 AM
MonkeyMind MonkeyMind is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Posts: 20
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

How can we get the SCOTUS to start taking up cases and maybe follow the constitution?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-20-2022, 9:07 PM
bigdaddyz1776's Avatar
bigdaddyz1776 bigdaddyz1776 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: California
Posts: 120
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I remember reading a couple of years ago that Hawaii passed some sort of resolution that wanted the 2A gone.

The best way to describe Hawaii, that I have heard a while ago, think of San Francisco having its own island.

The GOP is literally just a handful of people. And we think California or New York is bad enough in terms of opposition.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:47 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy

Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Military Boots 5.11 Tactical