Okay, good "talking points" on both sides above -- and I also get a bit peeved about the state of HI sometimes acting like a foreign country instead of a STATE of the so-called Union. And I'd like to see ALL American citizens have the SAME exercise of their 2nd Amendment RIGHTS no matter what state they live in.
But with permission, to keep on topic...
I agree that things don't look good for this lawsuit, but not sure exactly why. Sure, their repressive/anti-gun reality has been so, I guess, since Statehood (1959) so it'll be tough going changing that. I thought it MIGHT be because of the high Asian population (for a couple of reasons) but not sure, nor has anyone in HI ever really answered my question if race had anything to do with HI's repressive anti-gun situation thus far -- besides, of course, most HI politicians (and apparently the VOTERS who elected them) who are Liberal Democrats. Or, maybe it could be the white "mainland transplants" (haoles) if the majority of them also are Democrats -- you know, like the liberal Californians who move to other states and are ruining those states as well -- but I don't know how many mainland transplants are liberals and how many are conservatives. With no one race in diverse HI having any majority, it may not matter. Again, however, who knows -- except that MOST people must be usually voting Democrat every election (again since Statehood) otherwise HI would'nt be such a Democrat state, would it.
But the previous Governor of HI -- Linda Lingle -- was a Republican, yet still nothing happened on the gun-permit front. And for sure the present Governor -- Democrat Neil Abercrombie -- won't do anything but keep things as they always have been in HI: Repressive...he won't want "all those guns on the street" (even if legal this time), will he.
Still, NO lawsuit SURELY won't get anywhere, will it, so if for no other reason, it needs to be done.
It's a start, and an effort LONG overdue!
Interesting though, it seemed the Honolulu Star-Advertiser (newspaper) didn't post the story very quickly -- I saw the news HERE first. it was almost like an afterthought, and just a simple mention, really. I would think they would have been quicker printing such news than they were...not sure their lateness means anything or not, even though it's a liberal paper (as most are). I sometimes post comments to their stores, usually re: their stories on the robbery, beating, knifing or shooting of the day, and reading other people's comments suggests there ARE a fair amount of people in that state who are NOT happy with the situation -- they want to be tough on crime and aren't happy about not being allowed to carry. But who knows what the actual numbers are? And my suggestion to get a comprehensive "market study" done -- or at least a petition going to guage the average citizen's position on "gun control" as it has been -- and the denial of any legal way to carry as well -- hasn't gotten any traction so far I guess.
So yeah, it'll be tough going to bring about change.
I wonder how many people in HI have been carrying "illegally" anyway all these years, since the state gives them no LEGAL way to carry past the front door of their homes. I can't say I blame them. And if the lawsuit fails, and HI is given some "legal mandate" to CONTINUE ignroing the 2nd Amendment by denying its citizens the right to SOME form of carry (CC or OC), then I suspect MORE people will decide to become "criminals" and carry anyway. Sure, they'll be "outed" the first time they USE the gun, but hopefully, they'll be alive because of it.
What a sad state (no pun intended) of affairs where citizens have no legal way to protect themselves yet will become criminals if they do. But maybe this lawsuit is the first chipping-away of that stone wall that has existed since Statehood.
Hope so.