Supreme Court Case May Impact Hawaii Lawsuit – Bearing Arms

4



The state of Hawaii is one of many that doesn’t respect your right to bear arms. However, the recent decision by the Supreme Court to hear a case regarding New York’s concealed carry law may have serious ramifications in Hawaii.

While the New York case deals specifically with New York’s “may issue” law, the ruling that comes out of it may have far-reaching ramifications.

Including some of Hawaii’s insane Second Amendment infringements.

Hawaii’s strict gun laws could be put to the test at the U.S. Supreme Court.

On Monday, justices agreed to hear a case from New York over the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense. Hawaii is one of eight states with restrictive laws in place that are relevant to the case.

A similar gun rights case from Hawaii is also making its way toward the high court.

George Young, of Hilo, sued Hawaii County after being denied a license to carry a handgun in public. He said he wanted to carry the firearm for self-defense, and not being able to do so is a civil rights violation.

Young appealed the decision to reject his permit. Three federal appeals court judges later ruled in his favor, but the state asked more judges to hear the case.

That would be when the Ninth Circuit said the right to keep and bear arms doesn’t mean you actually get a right to bear arms. Yeah, it doesn’t make sense to me, either.

However, the fact that the cases are so similar means that pretty much any ruling by the Court against New York could also impact the Ninth Circuit’s ruling. That is, ultimately, a good thing…assuming, of course, that the Court does overturn the ruling. I have little doubt they will, mind you, but there’s always a chance they’ll do something unexpected.

Needless to say, though, anti-gun lawmakers around the country are concerned. In just a single ruling, the Court could destroy years of “may issue” restrictions that would set gun control advocates back decades in the eight states that still have those restrictive licensing laws in place.

I get why anti-gunners think that “may issue” is a good way to go, but they’re forgetting that those who are a problem have been carrying guns for years and haven’t even bothered with a carry permit in the first place. A permit is a step that only a law-abiding citizen is going to undertake.

So not just would a ruling overturning “may issue” laws be constitutionally sound, it would also have zero negative impact on public safety. If anything, more law-abiding citizens carrying guns may make the state even safer. Not that you’d ever hear any public official in Hawaii or other “may issue” states admit as much.



View original Post

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here