How does this affect Hawaii?

SCOTUS released their decision of McDonald v Chicago.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

Went 5-4 that the Second Amendment is incorporated.

I'm a local born Filipino and
I'm moving back to Oahu and bringing all my firearms with me. I'm a NV resident with a CC permit and already have one my Glocks registered in Oahu from last years trip to Honolulu.
I know of the "May-not" issue CC and no OC laws. May this soon change based on this ruling?
I'll be back in August and would sure like to get together with as many Pro 2A people to help get things stirred/changed.

State statutes must be challenged in state supreme court after their cases make their way up through the jurisprudential feeding chain. And you don't want just any old case but a good one, remembering that a good error is better than a bad case.

Not state court

Doug Huffman said:

State statutes must be challenged in state supreme court after their cases make their way up through the jurisprudential feeding chain. And you don't want just any old case but a good one, remembering that a good error is better than a bad case.

Click to expand...

You should go Federal, do not go to Hawaii Court. They pretty much said in the 1990's in State v Mendoza (Hawaii Supreme Court) that their RKBA provision means nothing. You are better off in the 9th circuit. Nordyke may even give additional guidance on top of McDonald for the 9th cir.

Jared said:

You should go Federal, do not go to Hawaii Court. They pretty much said in the 1990's in State v Mendoza (Hawaii Supreme Court) that their RKBA provision means nothing. You are better off in the 9th circuit. Nordyke may even give additional guidance on top of McDonald for the 9th cir.

Click to expand...

The question is can you have a handgun in your residence? If so, I don't think McDonald will be of any immediate help. The next question will be of "fair and reasonable" regulations. If the city is constructively banning handgun ownership by onerous regulations, that should be unconstitutional on its face via the McD decision, but have to be litigated separately. As the 2A says "keep and bear," the real next issue will be on "bear." WI has no CCWs, but is fairly liberal on OC. NYC, DC or Chicago will be the likely test cases.

Carry test case will likely be Palmer in DC

Gunslinger said:

The question is can you have a handgun in your residence? If so, I don't think McDonald will be of any immediate help. The next question will be of "fair and reasonable" regulations. If the city is constructively banning handgun ownership by onerous regulations, that should be unconstitutional on its face via the McD decision, but have to be litigated separately. As the 2A says "keep and bear," the real next issue will be on "bear." WI has no CCWs, but is fairly liberal on OC. NYC, DC or Chicago will be the likely test cases.

Click to expand...

I think the Palmer case in DC is up before a DC judge and will either be decided in favor of Palmer or appealed. If it is appealed, then the right to carry will be nationwide.

ccwinstructor said:

I think the Palmer case in DC is up before a DC judge and will either be decided in favor of Palmer or appealed. If it is appealed, then the right to carry will be nationwide.

Click to expand...

If it makes it to SCOTUS. If it stays in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, it'll only effect DC, the federal government, federal land, and the unorganized unincorporated federal territories (American Samoa in specific).

"reasonable restrictions"

In Hawaii you can:
Own handguns
Shoot within city limits
Keep them in your house/business
No limits on quantity
No 50 cal ban

And TECHNICALLY it is a may issue state. The fact that they WILL NOT is a seperate issue. I don't see where you could sue Hawaii unless we went with a Right to Carry law for the whole US.

Since Hawaii is a may-issue state, I'd say it's fair game for attack.

In New York (2nd Circuit) you now have Kachalsky v. Cacace filed by the Second Amendment Foundation against their may-issue status.

In California (9th Circuit, closer to home) you now have Sykes v. McGinness filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and Peruta v. County of San Diego filed by Edward Peruta, both against their may-issue status.

Remember, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is now a fundamental right, applicable to all states.

Right now someone who's been denied could file in Hawaii, cutting and pasting salient points from the aforementioned filings.

Could a tourist sue because they can not carry? Would they have to apply for a permit and be denied to sue for a civil rights violation?

Could a tourist sue because they can not carry?

Sue for what? Sue for Hawaii to recognize out-of-state licenses? Apply as a non-resident for a license?

Would they have to apply for a permit and be denied to sue for a civil rights violation?

There's currently a federal case in Colorado asking that the state be forced to accept non-resident license applications. Now, would this theoretical denial be based on residency or need. If based on need, then California has two cases addressing that issue.

Also, would one sue because OC is illegal and CC is essentially nonexistent? That's a ban on carrying firearms.

We'll have to see how New York and California (and Colorado) all play out.