cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
Federal judge dismisses suit over isle gun laws
By Ken Kobayashi (Honolulu Star Advertiser newspaper)
POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Dec 08, 2012
"A federal judge has rejected the latest challenge to Hawaii gun control laws by dismissing a lawsuit filed by a Hawaii island man who claimed the statutes violate his rights under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.
The ruling by Senior U.S. District Judge Helen Gillmor follows a line of Hawaii federal court decisions rejecting similar challenges to state gun laws.
Jonathan Lowy, Brady Center Legal Action Project director, hailed the ruling Friday and said the decision is also the latest nationwide upholding state restrictions on carrying guns in public.
George K. Young Jr., 62, a nonlawyer representing himself, filed his lawsuit in June claiming that state laws violate his constitutional right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.
He contended his rights were violated when Hawaii County police denied him a license to carry a concealed or unconcealed gun in public."
<snip>
""Hawaii's firearm carrying laws do not violate the plaintiff's Second Amendment rights," Gillmor said in a 40-page decision filed Nov. 29.
"The carrying laws do not restrict the core protection afforded by the Second Amendment."
<snip>
-- http://www.staradvertiser.com/newsp...ses_suit_over_isle_gun_laws.html?id=182644501
...and the case was simply "dismissed," which suggests an arrogant anti-gun judge wouldn't even give it serious consideration or waste her time finding any merit in the case/argument! But there IS merit: Why is the word "keep" in the 2nd Amendment a "core right" but the other word "bear" -- where it says KEEP and BEAR (IMO, "and" indicating equal importance) is NOT a "core right? Why is protecting onself ONLY at home a "core right" but protecting oneself when going OUT past one's front door, like to work & school for example, NOT a "core right?" Are people expected to STAY HOME their entire lives?
Rulings like this sure do make me think there REALLY IS a "vast Left Wing conspiracy" out there, with NO regard for the US Constitution whatsoever (except the parts/civil rights they LIKE).
Are there ANY Federal judges/courts in America where one CAN expect JUSTICE -- like affirming the constitution instead of eroding it?
Seems there is LITTLE hope of correcting anything "working within the system." And not only in HI, but nationally.
By Ken Kobayashi (Honolulu Star Advertiser newspaper)
POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Dec 08, 2012
"A federal judge has rejected the latest challenge to Hawaii gun control laws by dismissing a lawsuit filed by a Hawaii island man who claimed the statutes violate his rights under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.
The ruling by Senior U.S. District Judge Helen Gillmor follows a line of Hawaii federal court decisions rejecting similar challenges to state gun laws.
Jonathan Lowy, Brady Center Legal Action Project director, hailed the ruling Friday and said the decision is also the latest nationwide upholding state restrictions on carrying guns in public.
George K. Young Jr., 62, a nonlawyer representing himself, filed his lawsuit in June claiming that state laws violate his constitutional right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.
He contended his rights were violated when Hawaii County police denied him a license to carry a concealed or unconcealed gun in public."
<snip>
""Hawaii's firearm carrying laws do not violate the plaintiff's Second Amendment rights," Gillmor said in a 40-page decision filed Nov. 29.
"The carrying laws do not restrict the core protection afforded by the Second Amendment."
<snip>
-- http://www.staradvertiser.com/newsp...ses_suit_over_isle_gun_laws.html?id=182644501
...and the case was simply "dismissed," which suggests an arrogant anti-gun judge wouldn't even give it serious consideration or waste her time finding any merit in the case/argument! But there IS merit: Why is the word "keep" in the 2nd Amendment a "core right" but the other word "bear" -- where it says KEEP and BEAR (IMO, "and" indicating equal importance) is NOT a "core right? Why is protecting onself ONLY at home a "core right" but protecting oneself when going OUT past one's front door, like to work & school for example, NOT a "core right?" Are people expected to STAY HOME their entire lives?
Rulings like this sure do make me think there REALLY IS a "vast Left Wing conspiracy" out there, with NO regard for the US Constitution whatsoever (except the parts/civil rights they LIKE).
Are there ANY Federal judges/courts in America where one CAN expect JUSTICE -- like affirming the constitution instead of eroding it?
Seems there is LITTLE hope of correcting anything "working within the system." And not only in HI, but nationally.
Last edited: