02-08-2024, 03:46 PM
From: Fox News
This war isn't brother against brother, but instead is being pushed as states rights verses citizens rights (wait wasn't the other civil war about that similar... never mind). The point being that instead of outright blood shed, we are seeing the political elites trying to use the law against the public in a very open and unConstitutional way, even going so far as to say that what is written isn't what something says. As they put it:
Point is now with this ruling, I wonder if anything the SCOTUS says will be held as "Law of the Land" given that each land can just do whatever they want regardless of what the people there say? Further in the article,
Even though this is just a 2A story, we must not forget that if you pull a thread, the sweater as a whole falls apart, and Hawaii is pulling of the Constitution here. I mean if Hawaii wants to act like a US Territory, or even worse a fully independent nation, then we can just treat it like Puerto Rico whenever a disaster happens, or hand it over to China (since we can harbor a guess at who would be aiming for it if they went full Independent State).
I wonder if this ruling by the Hawaiian SC goes unchecked, then how long will it be before other states start taking the same stance of SCOTUS rulings?
Quote:Hawaii's highest court ruled Wednesday that Second Amendment rights as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court do not extend to Hawaii citizens, citing the "spirit of Aloha."
In the ruling, which was penned by Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Todd Eddins, the court determined that states "retain the authority to require" individuals to hold proper permits before carrying firearms in public. The decision also concluded that the Hawaii Constitution broadly "does not afford a right to carry firearms in public places for self defense," further pointing to the "spirit of Aloha" and even quoting HBO's TV drama "The Wire."
"Article I, section 17 of the Hawaii Constitution mirrors the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution," the Hawaii Supreme Court decision states. "We read those words differently than the current United States Supreme Court. We hold that in Hawaii there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public."
This war isn't brother against brother, but instead is being pushed as states rights verses citizens rights (wait wasn't the other civil war about that similar... never mind). The point being that instead of outright blood shed, we are seeing the political elites trying to use the law against the public in a very open and unConstitutional way, even going so far as to say that what is written isn't what something says. As they put it:
Quote:"The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities," it adds. "The history of the Hawaiian Islands does not include a society where armed people move about the community to possibly combat the deadly aims of others."
Point is now with this ruling, I wonder if anything the SCOTUS says will be held as "Law of the Land" given that each land can just do whatever they want regardless of what the people there say? Further in the article,
Quote:In addition, the Hawaii Supreme Court notes a quote from HBO's "The Wire," that "the thing about the old days, they the old days." The court's opinion states that it "makes no sense" for contemporary society to pledge allegiance to "the founding era’s culture, realities, laws, and understanding of the Constitution."
The case dates to December 2017, when Hawaii citizen Christopher Wilson was arrested and charged with improperly holding a firearm and ammunition in West Maui. The firearm Wilson was arrested carrying was unregistered in Hawaii, and he never obtained or applied for a permit to own the gun. He told police officers that the firearm was purchased in 2013 in Florida.
Wilson argued in court that the charges brought against him violated the Second Amendment. But, according to The Reload, the Hawaii high court explicitly rejected the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment in 2008’s District of Columbia v. Heller and 2022’s New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which both held that there is a constitutionally protected right to carry firearms.
Even though this is just a 2A story, we must not forget that if you pull a thread, the sweater as a whole falls apart, and Hawaii is pulling of the Constitution here. I mean if Hawaii wants to act like a US Territory, or even worse a fully independent nation, then we can just treat it like Puerto Rico whenever a disaster happens, or hand it over to China (since we can harbor a guess at who would be aiming for it if they went full Independent State).
I wonder if this ruling by the Hawaiian SC goes unchecked, then how long will it be before other states start taking the same stance of SCOTUS rulings?
