The non-profit Hawaii Defense Foundation president Christopher Baker has filed a lawsuit against the Honolulu Chief of Police Louis Kealoha, the Honolulu Police Department and the City & County of Honolulu as well as the State of Hawaii and Gov. Neil Abercrombie for violating the Second and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
The complaint, which was filed in Hawaii’s U.S. District Court by attorneys Richard Holcomb, Alan Beck and Kevin O’Grady, argues that Hawaii’s license to carry firearms statute as well as Hawaii’s other firearm regulations, are unconstitutional.
Michelle Yu, spokesperson for the Honolulu Police Department, said the chief has no comment on the lawsuit.
Hawaii has some of the most restrictive gun policies in the country.
Hawaii is a “may issue” rather than “shall issue” state, which means that police chiefs that provide concealed and open carry firearms permits may issue them at will. This is different that shall issue states, where the government must provide concealed carry permits so long as the applicant passes all background checks and has no history of mental illness.
A total of 49 states have a concealed carry law with Illinois being the exception. Illinois has banned carrying of all concealed weapons including guns and knives. Wisconsin changed its law in July 2011 to allow concealed carry.
Baker said licenses to carry in Hawaii are only issued in “exceptional circumstance” or “where a need or urgency has been sufficiently indicated.”
This language violates the Second Amendment, which secures the right of all responsible, law-abiding citizens to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, he said.
The lawsuit also claims that the state’s bad on non-lethal tools for self-defense such as electric guns is a violation of civil rights.
“The Second Amendment protects the right to self-defense. Everyday around the islands good people are robbed, assaulted, raped, or in the worst cases murdered. It’s simply a matter of physics, the Police can’t be everywhere to stop criminals from committing violent acts. We must be allowed to carry the tools that give us a chance to protect ourselves from harm,” Baker said. “We want criminals to have to think about the consequences of attacking someone,” he continued, “but right now, nothing serves as a deterrent to them – the odds are in their favor.”
The foundation, which was established as a mechanism to defend civil rights and offer educational courses on firearm safety, self-defense training, and life saving techniques, has launched a fundraising effort to support the litigation.
More information on the web (www.TheHDF.org).
Unfortunately the most harmed will tend to follow the statistics of the “hierarchy of the mechanical power on concrete” in easy comparison–Car drivers vs pedestrians sharing same road-who wins? Who has the most mechanical power? =Car driver
So with gun power it will work out as =the gun owner gets scared by a perceived threat and pulls out the gun on a person that really is not a threat-who wins? Who has the most mechanical power?=Gun owner
If a pedestrian chooses to challenge a car, yes, he will lose. If a would-be criminal chooses to threaten an armed citizen, he too will lose. Misguided “social justice” collectivists need to understand that one does not achieve equality or freedom by relinquishing one’s rights. It may be too late for soshaljustic.
[…] Never heard of the plaintiffs before, so I hope they know what they are doing. Our expert Second Amendment litigators often remind us the biggest threat are from ill considered suits brought forward by amateurs at best, and kooks at worst. Not saying that’s the case here, but always something to watch out for when you see new suits being filed. Looking at the actual suit, it doesn’t look bad. Given that, I wish them luck. […]
Thank you Chris, and the Hawaii Defense Foundation. It’s long past time that Hawaiian officials are forced to recognize law-abiding Hawaiians’ right to self defense. All of the cliches apply, including “when seconds count the police are only minutes away.” Violent crimes exists in Hawaii and our rights to bear arms to defend our family, friends, and neighbors are being infringed by officials of the State. That’s wrong and you’re fighting our fight.
This is long overdue! Most people still aren’t aware that the police’s “may issue” is fiction. It is in fact “will NEVER issue” and no citizen may carry a weapon. This is completely unconstitutional and just plain wrong. Whether you prefer a gun to be in the open or concealed will always be an ongoing argument, but we must be allowed to defend ourselves- with a firearm. Period. That’s why our founding fathers wrote it down in the constitution.
Just to compare- please ask yourself, “Would it be okay to require a complicated permit and waiting period to excercise my first amendment right to speak freely?”
Seriously, picture it. “I would like to voice my opinion. Applied for the permit…. nope, denied. Guess I just won’t speak.”
The “government” of Hawaii has placed its citizens in a dangerous “catch-22” by disallowing them to protect themselves with the self-defense tools of choice knowing that they (the police/government) have no legal obligation to protect the citizens. And worse, it appears some of our elected officials (Keith Kaneshiro) are ignorant about this basic tenet of the law.
The suit has merit and the individuals involved are far from “kooks.” And while some of the attorneys may not be seasoned “expert Second Amendment litigators” they are not “amateurs” and have worked long and hard in this effort to restore the rights of the law abiding citizens of Hawaii.
And despite any anti-gun, anti-concealed carry rhetoric that is sure to come from the uninformed, there will be no “blood in the streets, wild west shootouts” over trivial matters. I have every confidence in Hawaii’s citizens to handle themselves as well as the citizens of other states with more permissive laws. You know, those states where the same emotional-laden arguments predicted horrible increases in gun crime and deaths (especially those shootouts over parking spaces and the like by concealed carry licensees…) and where in reality crime went down and concealed permit holders were found to be some of the most law-abiding individuals in the population.
In light of the recent court decisions (Heller, McDonald) Hawaii should just modify its laws rather than waste valuable resources on a lawsuit they are destined to loose.
sochaljustic, that’s a commonly raised concern in areas where the legislature or courts are considering a change to carry laws. However, almost every other state allows law-abiding citizens to carry in some manner if they so desire, and the statistics show that your concern is unfounded. Invariably, firearms permit holders are less likely to cited for infractions than the population at large. If a permit holder is forced to use his or her firearm, they are actually less likely to injure an innocent bystander than the police. Hopefully HDF will win the suit and you’ll get a chance to see that firearm owners are not psychotic killers in waiting; rather, we are law-abiding, upstanding citizens.
It’s about time! Imagine having to get a permission slip from the government to practice in the religion of your choice. Why is it that the Hawaiian government feels okay with restricting the Second Amendment, being able to defend yourself is a fundamental right. I believe that recent events in Hawaii have shown that their gun laws are ineffective against keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals, but they have been effective at keeping law abiding citizens at a disadvantage. In effect making them an easy target.
[…] carry firearms statute as well as Hawaii’s other firearm regulations, are unconstitutional.-[source] August 25th, 2011 | Tags: civil rights, concealed carry, Constitution, courts, Crime, criminals, […]
Comments are closed.