Government

Hawaii’s Restrictive Gun Laws to be Challenged in Court

The 2nd Amendment may be coming back to the Aloha State.

Hawaiis Restrictive Guns Laws Challenged in CourtHawaii has joined the list of states facing lawsuits over restrictive gun regulations filed on the basis of 2nd Amendment violations last week, according to the Hawaii Reporter.

Chris Baker, President of the non-profit Hawaii Defense Foundation, filed the lawsuit against a variety of state and local officials claiming that Hawaii’s firearms licensing statutes and other gun regulations are unconstitutional.

Hawaii is a “may issue” state, which means that police determine who gets a carry permit and who doesn’t. On the other hand, in “shall issue” states– like Texas– the government must provide concealed carry permits as long as the applicant passes all background checks and has no history of mental illness.

You can find a handy map of “may” vs “shall” issue states for gun permits here.

Hawaiis Restrictive Guns Laws Challenged in CourtBaker said that the law as it currently stands allows a Hawaiian to carry a firearm only under “exceptional circumstance” or “where a need or urgency has been sufficiently indicated.” The police chief himself in Honolulu must personally approve any concealed carry permit. To summarize the impetus for his court case, Baker told the Hawaii Reporter his belief that:

“The Second Amendment protects the right to self-defense… we must be allowed to carry the tools that give us a chance to protect ourselves from harm. We want criminals to have to think about the consequences of attacking someone.”

Recently gun rights advocates have won major victories in Washington, D.C. and Florida. An important court case is pending in President Obama’s home state of Illinois, which effectively abrogated the 2nd Amendment and banned legal possession of firearms in Chicago.

It appears the gun rights community is gaining momentum, and if the Hawaii lawsuit is successful, it could help pave the way for the realization of the right to bear arms nationwide.

Comments (117)

1 2 3
  • Marine 1
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:45am

    The U.S. Constitution is quite clear on the citizens’ right to carry a firearm but the government — poeple within the government — want to control the people. That is called communism. Just look at history of several nations. Once the powers that be control your guns you are no longer free and the rest of the Constitution is gone. Four states now have Constitutional Carry — Vermont, Alaska, Arizona and Wyoming. Many other states are getting with the program because of the PEOPLE standing up and demanding it. Never, never, never give up your guns Americans. When you do it’s all over. Just ask the good folks in the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada. We, the people, have rights protected by the U.S. Constitution and carring a firearm is a right given to us by GOD and not by any man on this earth. Hang tough and make your voices heard on the matter. Oh, Hawaii is not the only vacation spot in this country. Been there, done that! Very expensive. Check out Montana, Utah, Arizona and other states with plenty to do and see. Take your gun with you too! For Freedom.

    Report Post »  
    • Phoenixsoulfire
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:57am

      @Marine 1 Preaching to the choir my friend! Although there might be some in here who don’t know this and others who want the government to protect us like whats his name Enocim? something like that

      Report Post »  
    • Dismayed Veteran
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 12:22pm

      I bet 99% of the people posting are prepared to defend their 2nd Ammendment Right

      Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
    • Son_of_Liberty
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 1:20pm

      “No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” Thomas Jefferson

      3%

      Report Post » Son_of_Liberty  
    • korbin
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 1:51pm

      Couldn’t have said it any better. I would like to point out that if folks have time to read and post on this site, you have time to contact your state representatives. The NRA has a web site that will allow you to receive legislative updates on your state regarding 2nd amendment issues, I live in Connufornia, and I contact my representatives daily. when I get an update from the NRA all you do is read the bill or proposed bill and click on link and you are the site to voice your opinion, We out number the left anti gun progressives 2 to 1 so why are we letting them take away any rights. They get involved thats how. Don’t rely on your neighbor to do it for you , if you want to continue living as free as we can get involved, don’t be a SHEEP> Support your local military families too while you are at it.

      Report Post »  
    • OneofMany
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 4:43pm

      @Marine1:

      I was the one asking for help in California and I read your post, but I get discouraged because all the NRA does is tell me to call my politicians (and I do EVERY time) but they are ultra liberal and could give a flying fart about gun rights. I vote and obviously that has zero effect in California…

      I wish the NRA or Dudly Brown (National Association of Gun Rights) would do a hard core targeted campaign in California… It feels like they have given up on California as well, probably because California anti-gun people are well funded.

      I even have friend in the police force that are anti-gun…and when I quiz them, they are so filled with the propaganda, they are unaware of the REAL statistics dealing with gun freedom. And they only come around a little bit even when they are looking at hard evidence.

      20/20 did a piece on gun control a few years back that was excellent. Even criminals acknowledge they prefer states with gun control to do their crimes because thy are afraid of the citizens in states with gun freedom.

      I guess I’m just discouraged. But even if they try to take my guns, I will just hide them in the hills where i can get to them when I need them.

      Report Post » OneofMany  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:17pm

      guns aren’t the only way to portably project mass amounts of metal twards someone… just saying… ;)

      Report Post »  
  • akabosan
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:38am

    If there is an English / grammar teacher among us, I have a question. It seems to me the 2nd amendment is made up of a phrase and a clause. A clause is the part of a sentence which can stand alone as a sentence itself. A phrase does not stand alone, but is used to describe the clause. Something like that.. “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.” OWTTE Am I right? GB

    Report Post » akabosan  
    • cemerius
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:01am

      Yeah…the CCW permit should be a copy of the 2nd Amendment NOTHING else needed….

      Report Post » cemerius  
    • Oahujack
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:38am

      The Hawaii penal code, section 134 says that you can get a permit to carry. I just retired from the Honolulu PD in March. In my 20 plus years there have been only 3 permits issued. One was for the civilian armorer of the police department, and the other 2 were to political figures. Go to the Honolulu Police Department Firearms Section at 801 S. Beretania St and ask for a permit application. They officers at the window will openly laugh at you and tell you you are wasting your time. Yes, it is possible to get a permit, but no one has ever gotten one!

      Report Post »  
    • Viet Vet
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:49am

      A well regulated (trained) militia, being necessary to the security of a free state (nation), the right of the people (whole of the citizenry) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

      The first part explains the purpose of the last part (statement).

      Report Post »  
    • nitnop
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 1:55pm

      @oahujack I feel your pain, also on Oahu and its a down right pain in the ass to get a gun out here. the courses, the 3 day wait, HPD is hard to get to the only useful dealer is in town. The gun laws are the only down side to the state. i miss my arsenal i had to eave on the mainland. particularly my siaga 12 and my kimber 1911 SS raptor 2. but lucky i‘m going back for work and i’ll be carrying it again :) i love the feel of steel against skin.

      Report Post »  
    • Dundertaker
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 3:25pm

      So VIET VET: If it said “The Right to own Boats, being necessary for fishing; The right to own boats shall not be infringed” would that mean you couldn’t ski? Sail? or own a boat without fishing from it??

      Report Post »  
    • Viet Vet
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 4:46pm

      @ Dunderhead

      Your post is somewhat combobulated, but if your point is that there are other legitimate reasons for the ‘right to keep and bear arms’, I agree. But the primary thrust in the Founders drafting the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights was to offset a standing army and an arbitrary government. Two other legitimate reasons would be for hunting and self-defense, but the Founders thought those were God-Given rights. I did make one mistake in my original post though, that being the (whole of the citizenry) should have followed militia. To wit:

      A well regulated (trained) militia (whole of the citizenry), being necessary to the security of a free state (nation), the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

      Report Post »  
    • southpole
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 4:55pm

      not to be pedantic but I believe the 2nd Amend. says “….KEEP and bear arms…”

      Report Post »  
    • normusa
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:57pm

      @Akabosan–You need to quote it correctly: “….the right of the people to KEEP AND bear arms, shal not be infringed.” It is very important that we keep (own) our arms. And don’t forget that “arms” includes knives and more. Cheers

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:26pm

      self defense is a right. do criminals use guns? (they don’t care if they are banned or not, you can’t deinvent the gun (projectile weapon).) do they use guns? i know the answer is yes. yes they do use guns, now… how do you protect yourself against someone else if they are using a gun? you use a gun… if you don’t want people shooting at you, don’t shoot at them. end of story.

      it‘s beyond me how people don’t see that if everyone had a gun on them… who the hell would pull out a gun on someone else in a case like that?! KNOWING full well that they are going to get shot by 20 other people around them… who? noone. only a FEW crazy ass people. and we have that today with secret service, police and private security.. .how did that AZ governor get shot? there were police there… if the guy next to that guy had a gun because it was common practice to defend yourself, he could have stop the whole thing in one pull of the trigger. just because you don’t NEED to use your gun, even if it’s your WHOLE lifetime, that is GOOD… but you should NOT lock your door when you leave because NOONE ever breaks in… think about it.

      Report Post »  
  • South Philly Boy
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:18am

    Go Get Em

    Report Post » South Philly Boy  
  • StevosPowderIsDry
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:08am

    I live here in Hawaii and the “may issue” is B.S. Nobody ever gets one – it hasn’t happened in decades! The law is so strict to avoid any loopholes. I am allowed to have a permitted gun in my home and one at my business, but it cannot bet he same firearm. I am NOT allowed to transport a firearm to/from work and home in my vehicle. You may only have a firearm in your vehicle if you are a) taking it to/from a gun range, b) to/from a licensed gunsmith, or c) to/from a licensed FFL dealer. This little bit in the law keeps us from even having one in our vehicle – they don’t want them anywhere but locked up in your safe at home. I can’t wait for this progressive crap to come to an end. I will be the first in line to get that CCW permit!

    Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:18am

      The second ammendment is your permit.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • Banter
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:30am

      Move to our great state of Florida where none of the BS you state exists here.

      Report Post » Banter  
    • NO YOU CANT
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:03am

      @SGTB
      Well said.
      If you buy from person to person, you don’t need to register your gun- anywhere in the country.
      PS- concealed permits require registration to a government database- no thanks.
      Keep it in the open and dare them to arrest you.
      Let’s see a judge deny that right- then lets protest Acorn style and show up at their houses.

      Report Post » NO YOU CANT  
    • OhioRifleman
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:04am

      Ohio is open for business – and if you live out in the country with a few acres of land, it’s also a good wide-open shooting range. There are many states without the bullcrap laws you suffer under, choose wisely :)

      Report Post » OhioRifleman  
    • David286 - FL
      Posted on September 2, 2011 at 11:33am

      @Banter – even Florida violates the 2nd Amendment with current firearms laws….we can not open carry period and also without permission from the state we can not carry legally…A right requires NO permission! Granted Florida isn’t the worst but it still has away to go until it is in compliance with the Constitution.

      Report Post » David286 - FL  
  • JRook
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:01am

    Of course when anti-smoking laws become more restrictive then gun laws we will know that something is way way way off base.

    Report Post »  
    • JohnHW
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:18am

      The “right to smoke” is not specifically written into the U.S. Constitution while the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS is. There is no IFS, ANDS, or BUTS. The phase, which can stand alone, states: “THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” If any sheriff, police officer, district attorney, prosecutor, maker of state laws, etc., who cannot read and UNDERSTAND this in the Second Amendment, they should not be elected to office, hired into a position of authority, etc. There is no other definition, no other meaning, which can be read into this. This is NOT a states’ right matter!!!!! The states cannot pass a law or regulation which contravenes the plain language in the U.S. Constitution and any judge who rules otherwise, should be impeached for not following the plainly written law of this land. PERIOD!!!!

      Report Post » JohnHW  
    • JRook
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:56am

      @JohnHW While I applaud your passion it is somewhat off base. Freedom and liberty are the true fundamental rights. And the notion that states do not have the right to establish laws that place registration requirements or limit the individuals display or exercise of the right to bear arms is of course wrong. Similar to freedom of expression, states can establish obscenity or safety restrictions on the exercise of that right. i.e. you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater. You missed my point as I was arguing against state intrusion in our lives. Think beyond yourself and your ideological passion regarding guns. You could never convince me that there is a need for an individual to own an automatic weapon or be able to purchase a weapon at a gun show and avoid background checks or a waiting period. I support gun ownership but believe it should be a much harder and drawn out process to get one.

      Report Post »  
    • Bill in Texas
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 4:02pm

      Being an ex smoker I would have to say that would be a good thing.
      I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I wouldn’t mind going back to open carry myself. But that’s not allowed here only a CCP. We are a mus issue state though.

      Report Post »  
  • MrKnowItAll
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:59am

    Gomer Pyle (Jim Nabors) Owns a tremendous amount of Hawaii. I don’t think he is a Mormon unless he has many Husbands.

    Report Post » MrKnowItAll  
    • CHULAIGUY
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:32am

      No he does not! “For 25 years, he owned a macadamia nut plantation on Maui before selling it to the National Tropical Botanical Gardens.” Get your facts right before you post!

      Report Post » CHULAIGUY  
  • Daddy Hawg
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:30am

    The peoples republic of Maryland is also a may issue state controlled by the state police. I have a non-resident from Utah which allows me to load up as soon as I get out of the state and the DC areas. CCW is a huge responsibility and should not be taken lightly, but is a right worth fighting for. The founders wrote the second amendment based on the experience they just suffered through and I think it was intended to prevent future generations from being subjugated under a tyrranical governement.

    Report Post » Daddy Hawg  
    • SgtB
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:14am

      I agree that the founders wrote the second amendment after having seen first hand what happens when a tyrannical government deprives the god given or natural right of people to protect themselves. Where I may disagree is in the fact that the word arms is a very broad term and it means ANY weapon. Under the 2nd we have a constitutionally guaranteed right to have any weapon that we so desire and we have the right to use that weapon in whatever manner we see fit to protect ourselves. The original weapons ban that happened at Lexington took away all of the town’s cannons and rifles and put them in a central armory guarded by military forces. I see no difference between that and required permiting for certain weapons or the ban of certain weapons. Even if every state in the union were a shall issue state we would still be living under an oppressive government that is denying us our rights. We won’t be free until we can be secure in our effects and our person and not have to bow to government officials asking why we are carrying a tool to defend ourselves.

      PS. Police officers cause more deaths and accidents every year than they ought to. A black and white car on the road causes distracted driving and increased accident rates. Police enforcement of unconstitutional laws leads to the death of thousands every year. Not all cops are bad, but all are pawns of an oppressive government that has forgotten its own limits.

      Report Post » SgtB  
  • dudeofwrath
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:26am

    Article 1 Section 17 of the Hawaii State Constitution is worded exactly the same as U.S. Constitution.

    Report Post » dudeofwrath  
    • dudeofwrath
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:27am

      RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

      Section 17. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. [Ren Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]

      Report Post » dudeofwrath  
    • Wardmagic
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:35am

      Good…. Then they don’t mind allowing people to follow the Constitution. Just because u have water all around Hawaii….the Constitution still applies

      Report Post »  
    • JRook
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:19am

      But of course we willing accept anti-smoking laws that are more restrictive. ….And no I don’t smoke.

      Report Post »  
    • scjeff
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 12:37pm

      JROOK, my rule of life is this: take responsibility for yourself and your actions and when your actions affect others, then you are responsible for the others as well. This is the basis of anti-smoking laws because the smoke gets everywhere and affects others. The debate is on how much it affects others but that debate is different for gun laws restricting open and/or concealed carry because the gun will not affect others unless you are called upon to defend yourself.

      Report Post » scjeff  
    • Dismayed Veteran
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 12:38pm

      I wonder if the government of Hawaii knows that the militia of the US is composed of the Organized Militia: National Guard and Naval Militia and the Reserve Militia which is composed of every able bodied man at least 17 years of age and under 45 years of age who are disciplined in the use of arms.

      I don‘t see how Hawaii’s gun registration law is not constituional under the State Constitution.

      Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
    • JRook
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 3:54pm

      @scjeff First, smoke does not negatively effect peoples health in well ventilated or open areas. There are cities and states that now ban smoking in open areas. I could make a similar public health argument regarding people who are knowingly sick from the flu being allowed to leave their house. Also, similar to the answer given to people who oppose the Ohio law that let’s individual carry in bars…if you don‘t like it don’t go to that bar. If you don’t like a bar that allows people to smoke you are always free to go somewhere else. Second, it is not reasonable to always gloss over that everyone who buys a gun is a fine upstanding citizen merely exercising their 2nd. amendment rights. The lax registration laws at gun shows and private sales can certainly lead to guns being obtained by individuals who’s permit request would be rejected. Not withstanding the stupid Fast and Furious program there are a boat load of guns that are being sold at US gun shops along the border, that everyone including the gun industry knows are ending up in Mexico. Would be interested in seeing the sales figures for a couple of the more popular gun shops on the Texas Mexico border. Like many issues people tend to argue via extreme examples. At the end of the day I support the 2nd amendment and right to bear arms. I also support a rigorous permit and registration process, including restrictions on multiple sales within a short period of time.

      Report Post »  
    • Viet Vet
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 4:50pm

      @Dismayed Veteran

      The ‘militia’ addressed in the 2nd Amendment is not associated with the national guard. It is the whole of the citizenry, and purposely not associated with any governmental military.

      Report Post »  
  • cemerius
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:28am

    Ahhh I can see the beaches being opened up for all if this passes….no more gangs of “Local Hawaiins” beating people up for “beach rights”…. Hawaii is a racially motivated state and preferential to “locals”! Glad to see that sanity is creeping around the country and yes those of you in the Aloha state are Americans too!!

    Report Post » cemerius  
    • TX_45_ACP
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:41am

      California has the same problem. I’ve surfed there quite a few times and have been challenged and threatened by locals. Good thing i’m a big guy who can take care of himself. :)

      Report Post » TX_45_ACP  
    • cemerius
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 11:00am

      Yeah me too and I have a tendency to hit the wildest beaches…..crazy whiteboy at Sandy’s beach a.k.a. “neck break” beach :)

      Report Post » cemerius  
  • DanWesson455
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:26am

    This will make all those Japanese Land Investors FREAK! Japan has about the most restrictive gun laws any where…. This will be interesting when HAWAII LOSES.

    Report Post » DanWesson455  
    • cemerius
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:36am

      Mormons own most of the island property….NOT the Japanese

      Report Post » cemerius  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:36am

      Indeed, it should be interesting especially given that the Progressives have a stranglehold on Hawaii from what I understand.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • PeachyinGA
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:53am

      Cemerius, you peaked my interest in your statement, so I tried searching the web for Mormon ownership in Hawaii, but couldn’t find anything. Could you please point me in the right direction so I can also read the facts you have found? Thanks.

      Report Post » PeachyinGA  
    • marcsj
      Posted on September 2, 2011 at 12:05pm

      @Cemerius – what does “Mormons” (people who belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) have to do with this? I’m a “Mormon”, I own a gun, I conceal carry, and I go to Front Sight (frontsight.com) every year for training. I also vote for only those people who will not only defend, but restore ALL our 2nd Amendment rights – everywhere.

      Report Post »  
  • TomFerrari
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:23am

    Silly me, I thought the purpose of our federal government was, “TO PROTECT OUR RIGHTS,” which come from GOD, not from congress.

    hawaii is a liberal mess of a state, anyways – just like the wackos in California.
    .

    Report Post » TomFerrari  
  • Tyson
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:08am

    The second amendment written by the founders had far more reaching implications than self defense or hunting. It was meant as a deterant against a tyrannical government bent on removing your God given, inherant rights. So everyone that thinks I need a gun to protect me and my family from the bad guys, need only to turn CSPAN on and see who your real enemy is. Thom Jefferson said the beauty of the 2nd amendment is that it will not have to be exercised until they try to take it away. The “they” is our precious US Government. You better pack and be ready to use something a little more than the .380 in your pocket. If you don‘t beleive both parties won’t try to evidentual move for this right to be abolished you are as deluted as beleiving the Patriot Act was for your safety.

    Report Post » Tyson  
    • drago
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:17am

      You’re spot on Tyson, something i have been saying for quite some time…..

      Report Post »  
    • cemerius
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:26am

      flip that calibre around a bit and nothing says HELLO like my .308 :)

      Report Post » cemerius  
    • SgtB
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:34am

      It is always good to point out to liberals and progressives that the second was written a mere decade or so after the town of lexington had all of its armaments taken and locked away by their own government. It is also fun to call the revolutionary war the first civil war around them because they’ll refuse that fact.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • Trance
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:51am

      Exactly. Claiming that guns are “for hunting”, or “for self defense” is besides the point. The only argument that needs to be made is that we have a constitutional right, no matter the purpose.

      Report Post » Trance  
  • Darla_K
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:08am

    They really ought to be more worried about finding a law that prosecutes people that have forged birth certificates.

    Report Post » Darla_K  
  • 45-ACP
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:05am

    Carry a gun in one hand and the Bible and a copy of the constitution in the other and be completely covered.

    Report Post » 45-ACP  
  • SkunkWorks
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:03am

    Out here in Cali people carry crossbows :

    Passenger With Crossbow Shoots Boy Throwing Rocks At Cars

    http://www.10news.com/news/29025774/detail.html

    Report Post »  
    • stablepar
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 9:39am

      i hope they throw the book at the stupid kid

      Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 10:30am

      I linked to the story and was suprised to find out that “archery is not meant to shoot people”. I must have been confused when I was thinking that before black powder and rifles people used bows and arrows for ranged attacking or defense. Stupid people abound. They also said that a crossbow isn’t a defensive weapon… it is if you use it defensively. Of course I was always taught to use whatever you can find as a weapon when fighting, esecially defensively. One mind any weapon or something like that.

      Report Post » SgtB  
  • GERATMO
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:36am

    We love our guns, leave us alone.

    Report Post » GERATMO  
    • DrammyCoke
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:47am

      I love the protection that having a gun at my side allows.

      “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

      If I had to choose between freedom of speech and a gun I would choose a gun… and then I’d say whatever I want because I have a gun.

      Report Post » DrammyCoke  
  • ConservativeChristianB1954
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:34am

    When attacked in your home, what do you want to do? Call 911 (if the crook lets you) and wait 20 minutes or protect yourself in an instant? If you are in a bank or convenience store when it is being robbed, do you want to be a target or have a person who is licensed to carry in the store too? Anti gun people hate this statement but it is true: “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

    Report Post » ConservativeChristianB1954  
    • trog58
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:04am

      Some years ago, my then 15 yr old daughter was being harrassed at home by a bully from school. When the cops were called they asked if I owned a gun… and suggested I teach my kid how to use it!!
      Gotta love Indiana!!

      Report Post »  
  • liberalsarealiens
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:31am

    All I have to say is “It’s about time!”

    Report Post » liberalsarealiens  
    • RepubliCorp
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:17am

      (the police determine who gets a carry permit) Who gave them that power?

      Report Post » RepubliCorp  
  • Ironmaan
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:30am

    Look what Hillary and Obama quietly trying to do via the UN. http://guerillatics.com/?p=1108

    Report Post »  
  • Ironmaan
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:27am

    Gun laws or not, I carry. Tis better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. http://guerillatics.com

    Report Post »  
  • MAXIMUS_MARIUSZ
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:20am

    I am a law abiding citizen, but when it comes to this, no matter what the law says, own plenty of weapons. As soon as they have control of this, we’re in trouble. Why has America never been invaded? Because as the Japanese stated in WWII, “There is a gun behind every blade of grass”.

    Report Post »  
    • Rickfromillinois
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:39am

      Historically your comment about the United States never having been invaded is incorrect. You are forgetting the War of 1812.

      Report Post » Rickfromillinois  
    • Dismayed Veteran
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 12:50pm

      Don’t forget our final war with UK. The Pig War of 1859. The only casuality was a pig. The war was a boundary dispute on which islands in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Georgia Strait. Troops faced off. The US troops were commanded by Capitan George Pickett, later Confederate General Pickett.

      Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
    • Phantom II
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 4:20pm

      That was Naval General Isoroku Yamamoto himself. He also opposed war against the United States because of what he learned about America’s industrial might whilst studying at Harvard University (1919–1921) and his two postings as a naval attaché in Washington, D.C. Keep ‘em clean and dry.
      Better dead than red. Remember: Red is Green now.

      Report Post » Phantom II  
  • hifi74
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:18am

    Wisconsin was late to the game with the CCW permits only just recently passing legislation allowing for permitting. They were in the dark ages with Illinois on that one, but I am glad to see the recent changes have allowed me the constitutional right to conceal carry in Wisconsin now.

    Report Post » hifi74  
  • Lone Ranger
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:16am

    This is a prime example of how liberals ignore laws they dislike and turn a blind eye to and facts that dispute their position. You show me a city that has oppressive gun control, and I’ll show you a city where gun violence is out of control.

    Last year, D.C. had 150 murders and even more shootings. The year before it was 200. But, step just across the border into the wild and wooly “shall issue” state of Virginia and Alexandria had five killings last year, with Arlington having about six. And that’s the yearly average.

    Report Post » Lone Ranger  
  • loriann12
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:13am

    I lived in Illinois for about 5 years, and Hawaii for about 4 years. Illinois requires a FOID (Firearms Owner Identification) Card just to OWN a gun. I know because I had one. Hawaii is one of the most liberal states in the Union, don’t know about California, was only there for 5 weeks. I didn’t have a gun while in Hawaii, so don’t know about the rules. I do know if it hadn’t been so liberal, I would have “homesteaded” there.

    Report Post »  
  • SummerB
    Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:06am

    It‘s time that ’shall‘ rather than ’may’ come to NY, too!

    Report Post »  
    • let us prey
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:41am

      IMO there is no hope for the progressives cess pool that is NY.

      Report Post » let us prey  
    • Bill from NJ
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:42am

      Ditto for New Jersey…

      Report Post » Bill from NJ  
    • BIGJAYINPA
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 8:32am

      NY and NJ are both beyond hope as far as I can tell. My only wish is that the Delaware stays high and the bridges expensive (or dropped in the river if need be) to keep “them” on their side and away from mine…….Just sayin’

      Report Post » BIGJAYINPA  
    • FreeJersey
      Posted on August 31, 2011 at 7:50pm

      NJ is actually alot further along than Hi. A lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the justifiable need requirement for ccw has already been to the US district court here. A decision is expected in September. From there it will go to the SCOTUS regardless of who wins the district court case.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love