JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Just to add this is the 9th court grilling him.

And these brilliant people just made a AR15 upper a firearm so you have to serialize and register the upper and the lower on an AR15 as separate firearms. Everyone who has an AR15 in Hawaii had to register their uppers as of 9/13 or be a criminal
 
Just to add this is the 9th court grilling him.

And these brilliant people just made a AR15 upper a firearm so you have to serialize and register the upper and the lower on an AR15 as separate firearms. Everyone who has an AR15 in Hawaii had to register their uppers as of 9/13 or be a criminal
Did they pass that? How are they registering? Oahu registration only goes out 90 days and is full at the moment, they aren't even taking appointments. No new purchases are going through, or transfers whatsoever

36DF442D-0FB6-496C-940F-21D8FA00A52D.jpeg
 
Last Edited:
Did they pass that? How are they registering? Oahu registration only goes out 90 days and is full at the moment, they aren't even taking appointments. No new purchases are going through, or transfers whatsoever

View attachment 752823


Do you want your constitution violated? Ask us how!

They wrote a bad bill with a bunch of wording that made upper's firearms and how they have to be registered as firearms and its a giant mess. The same bill funds a gun commission and it was passed the same week they fired 2 of the 3 state psychiatrists on one island because of lack of funding.

Though I dont have any firearms here I sent emails from a fake name (I dont trust them at all) asking the sponsors of the bill how to register an upper and sent emails to them daily for a month without a single reply.

Best part? The bills pass in hawaii if the governor does not sign them. So this passed without a governor signature. He just has to ignore them long enough and they pass automatically. This one making uppers firearms, all 80% illegal, and a bunch of other stuff passed on 9/8 if I remember correctly.
 
Yay.... team BLUE! The party of the people. :rolleyes:

Funny, its even worse than this. The security guards they are taking about are only for concealed carry permits. There isnt even a mechanism to apply for an open carry permit. There are concealed carry permit applications but they all get denied unless it is for work as a security guard. But there is literally no way to apply for an open carry permit. The state's argument is even worse than this. They have never issued an open carry permit because they dont even offer a permit.

The judges should have asked "how is there an option for open carry if you dont even have an application process for the permit?"
 
I see that was from 2 years ago. My assumption is that nothing has really changed regarding open carry without a permit?

3 judges ruled it illegal and the state is appealing for the full en blanc hearing (all the judges for the court). But its something like year 8 of this case so it will never get to the supreme court. Young is over 70 and a vet so unfortunately he will die before seeing this to the end.

 
Just to add this is the 9th court grilling him.

And these brilliant people just made a AR15 upper a firearm so you have to serialize and register the upper and the lower on an AR15 as separate firearms. Everyone who has an AR15 in Hawaii had to register their uppers as of 9/13 or be a criminal
I'm glad I got out of there.
 
Do you want your constitution violated? Ask us how!

They wrote a bad bill with a bunch of wording that made upper's firearms and how they have to be registered as firearms and its a giant mess. The same bill funds a gun commission and it was passed the same week they fired 2 of the 3 state psychiatrists on one island because of lack of funding.

Though I dont have any firearms here I sent emails from a fake name (I dont trust them at all) asking the sponsors of the bill how to register an upper and sent emails to them daily for a month without a single reply.

Best part? The bills pass in hawaii if the governor does not sign them. So this passed without a governor signature. He just has to ignore them long enough and they pass automatically. This one making uppers firearms, all 80% illegal, and a bunch of other stuff passed on 9/8 if I remember correctly.
I remember that, I just didn't know it had passed. Glad I don't have any either. Thanks for the update
 
Funny, its even worse than this. The security guards they are taking about are only for concealed carry permits. There isnt even a mechanism to apply for an open carry permit. There are concealed carry permit applications but they all get denied unless it is for work as a security guard. But there is literally no way to apply for an open carry permit. The state's argument is even worse than this. They have never issued an open carry permit because they dont even offer a permit.

The judges should have asked "how is there an option for open carry if you dont even have an application process for the permit?"

You have it backward, the security guards are only issued Open Carry permits. That is the only type of permit allowed under the statute for persons "engaged in the protection of life and property." (H.R.S. 134-9). Concealed carry permits are only issued "In an exceptional case..." According to the state, there has not been "an exceptional case" in twenty years.

A guy at the Hawaii 2A website did a lot of research and discovered 1 concealed carry permit that was issued in the twenty years prior to the date this oral argument took place, but it was quickly revoked.

Of course, admitting that one was issued, but only for a few days, does not help the state's case.
 
The en banc oral argument in Young v. Hawaii will take place this Thursday, September 24th, at 1:30 PM. The video of the oral argument will be live-streamed here -> Live Video Streaming of Oral Arguments and Events

An archive of the oral argument will be uploaded to the Court's YouTube channel -> United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

In the interest of full disclosure, I filed a Federal lawsuit challenging California's bans on Loaded and Unloaded Open Carry around six months before Mr. Young filed his lawsuit. But his lawsuit was quickly dismissed with prejudice whereas the district court judge assigned to my case dragged my case out for nearly two and a half years before he held that the American people do not have a right to even possess a firearm, let alone carry one. I kid you not.

Because Mr. Young's notice of appeal was filed before mine, and because his appeal was argued and submitted three days before I argued my appeal, my Second Amendment claim depends upon what the 9th circuit ultimately decides in his appeal. Submission of my appeal for a decision is vacated pending the issuance of the Mandate in Young v. Hawaii.

Similarly, because my notice of appeal was filed before the third NRA/CRPA concealed carry appeal was filed (the previous two lost on appeal) my appeal has priority over that appeal. I had filed an unopposed motion to put my appeal back under submission for a decision because I was afraid that appeal might somehow slip ahead of mine. My motion was denied but the NRA/CRPA's appeal was subsequently stayed. That stay, for as long as it is in place, gives my appeal priority. My appeal is not stayed.
 
You have it backward, the security guards are only issued Open Carry permits. That is the only type of permit allowed under the statute for persons "engaged in the protection of life and property." (H.R.S. 134-9). Concealed carry permits are only issued "In an exceptional case..." According to the state, there has not been "an exceptional case" in twenty years.

A guy at the Hawaii 2A website did a lot of research and discovered 1 concealed carry permit that was issued in the twenty years prior to the date this oral argument took place, but it was quickly revoked.

Of course, admitting that one was issued, but only for a few days, does not help the state's case.

Ah ok, I was going by this which states "security firm CCW applicants" I have never seen an application for open carry. And it has been 4 conceal carry permits that have been given out in state history to regular citizens (bottom row)

1600798622475.png
 
The en banc oral argument in Young v. Hawaii will take place this Thursday, September 24th, at 1:30 PM. The video of the oral argument will be live-streamed here -> Live Video Streaming of Oral Arguments and Events

An archive of the oral argument will be uploaded to the Court's YouTube channel -> United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

In the interest of full disclosure, I filed a Federal lawsuit challenging California's bans on Loaded and Unloaded Open Carry around six months before Mr. Young filed his lawsuit. But his lawsuit was quickly dismissed with prejudice whereas the district court judge assigned to my case dragged my case out for nearly two and a half years before he held that the American people do not have a right to even possess a firearm, let alone carry one. I kid you not.

Because Mr. Young's notice of appeal was filed before mine, and because his appeal was argued and submitted three days before I argued my appeal, my Second Amendment claim depends upon what the 9th circuit ultimately decides in his appeal. Submission of my appeal for a decision is vacated pending the issuance of the Mandate in Young v. Hawaii.

Similarly, because my notice of appeal was filed before the third NRA/CRPA concealed carry appeal was filed (the previous two lost on appeal) my appeal has priority over that appeal. I had filed an unopposed motion to put my appeal back under submission for a decision because I was afraid that appeal might somehow slip ahead of mine. My motion was denied but the NRA/CRPA's appeal was subsequently stayed. That stay, for as long as it is in place, gives my appeal priority. My appeal is not stayed.

Do you think the state's attorney will come up with a better argument for why open carry is "legal and available here" but there has never been a permit issued (or even an application process for what I understand)?

A while back the state was talking about using tax dollars to hire an out of state attorney dream team to fight this. Do you know if they ended up doing that?
 
Do you think the state's attorney will come up with a better argument for why open carry is "legal and available here" but there has never been a permit issued (or even an application process for what I understand)?

A while back the state was talking about using tax dollars to hire an out of state attorney dream team to fight this. Do you know if they ended up doing that?

In regards to the chart from your prior post, I think I know the guy who prepared it. He used "CCW" to mean the same thing it means in California "Carry Concealable Weapon" (e.g., a handgun). Nearly everyone thinks it means "Carry Concealed Weapon."

California does have handgun Open Carry licenses available to the general public but they are only theoretically available in counties with a population of fewer than 200,000 people and are only valid in the county of issuance. Both are called CCW licenses in California.

The state's attorney you saw in the video clip fumbling his oral argument has been replaced with attorney Neal Kumar Katyal. Do not expect him to make a shambles of his oral argument like his predecessor did.

Neal Katyal - Wikipedia

I suspect that Katyal will stick to his "script" which is to say his en banc petition, notwithstanding questions asked by the panel.

https://michellawyers.com/wp-conten...Hawaii_Petition-for-Rehearing-En-Banc_155.pdf

There are many problems with Katyal's argument but even if we accept that Intermediate Scrutiny applies, as four other Federal circuit court of appeals have held, the states in those other circuits actually issue handgun carry permits to the general public. Hawaii's law, H.R.S. 134-9 allows for a de facto ban on the issuance of carry permits to the general public, and there is no way to square that with Intermediate Scrutiny.

Also, Intermediate Scrutiny requires the state to present evidence in support of the law. The procedural posture of Mr. Young's appeal is that his case was dismissed by the district court judge, on a motion to dismiss, without leave to amend and without the state submitting any evidence.

A similar thing happened in the 7th circuit court of appeals in Moore v. Madigan. That did not turn out very well for the State of Illinois.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top