2a rights in Hawaii and politicians

[Wao nahele kane]

Here's a list of Hawaii politicians and their grades for protection of the 2nd amendment. This may help when it comes time to vote this year.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...=121563752

[snorkle]

Thanks for posting this. It helped me decide on a couple of candidates who I wasn't sure of.

(The red is good, right?)

[Wao nahele kane]

Snorkle, that all depends on your respect for the guidelines of how laws are supposed to be adopted in this nation. If you have no respect for the amendment process and think laws should be adopted that violate Constitutional amendments without use of the amendment process then red would be indeed good to you.

[snorkle]

Hey, I'm all for the amendment process.

I don't mean to devolve into national politics, but it's the NRA crowd that wants to keep the second amendment unchanged; in spite of the technological leaps made by their sponsors, the arms industry. (one minute per round, when the original law was made)

To bring it back to Hawaii;
I love living here with our state's restrictive gun laws. I have served in combat, know and respect guns, but certainly don't need one here to feel safe. If I lived in Texas, I'd reconsider, but carrying wouldn't make me feel safer; on the contrary.

I pity the poor soul who feels so insecure that they need to travel around Puna armed(with the exception of our understaffed, overextended, police force, that is)

edit;grammer

[Wao nahele kane]

Snorkel,
I haven't carried since I was in the service (30 years ago) and feel no need to now. That being said, the right still exists regardless of the current Hawaii laws that undermine the right. Please don't mistake my support for my personal needs. I support gay marriage but I'm not gay. I support everyone's basic rights and I, just as you, swore to uphold and defend the very same Constitution and that support will continue even in my votes.

[oink]

"Soldiers were expected to be able to fire a shot every 15 seconds for at least 4 minutes before needing to slow down because of the fouling in the barrel." http://www.doublegv.com/ggv/battles/tactics.html

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[snorkle]

Thanks oink,

"Rifles, while much more accurate than muskets, also were loaded much slower. It would take almost 30 seconds, and sometimes a minute or more, to reload a rifle."(from the same article)

Like I said; I really like living in Hawaii with it's strict gun laws. I feel that criminals(and children)get their hands on guns more easily when firearms are more prolific (and in the possession of untrained or careless people). I don't think an automatic weapon with a thirty round magazine is necessary for home defense when a shotgun will do.

I also (like a good conservative), support states rights; including their right to regulate alcohol, transportation, cannabis, and firearms. Regulation is different than prohibition.

[snorkle]

kane;
I'm not being sarcastic when I say mahalo for this informative link.
I do think it may (unintentionally?) guide people here to candidates who favor gun control.

Example;
I was on the fence about David Ige for Governer, but his HRA endorsement has me going back to Neil Abercrombe.

also;
I now favor Wendell Ka'ehu'ae'a over Gilbert Kahale for the same reasons.

I mentioned above about weapons in the hands of "competent" people; I can't say for sure that County Council candidate Daniel Cunningham is competent or not; but I think he would have trouble firing a gun with socks on his hands(He got an "A" from the HRA).

[Wao nahele kane]

What's interesting is that somehow there's this misconception that a majority are in favor of draconian infringements and that automatic weapons are somehow a factor in the issue. Automatic weapons are not available to anyone in Hawaii legally with the exception of LEO and military. They haven't been available since Statehood began. What oink was talking about is the few automatic weapons that are still floating about before the federal ban but not even those weapons are available in Hawaii and haven't been since statehood. Personally, I couldn't give a crap about automatic weapons legal status one way or another. I do however take a stand against these petty created laws that are painting common semi automatic rifles out to be "assault rifles" because they APPEAR to resemble a full auto weapon. They are not true "assault rifles". I recently saw a major news networks poll that showed 88% of Americans in favor of the right to carry with 4% only in self defence and the remaining 8% opposed, so this position that its the NRA that is causing all the resistance to anti 2a legislation is a false assumption.

As long as people want to support politicians who subvert the supreme law of the land we will continue to experience trampling of all rights.

This is the voice of the people not the NRA - http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/poll-do-you-t...uns-public

[Wao nahele kane]

The legislation here that addresses semi auto rifles that have pistol grips etc are no more coherent than laws that address cars that have been customized in body shape with perhaps a wind scoop on the back. They are nonsensical and a waste of the legislatures time. Personally, I don't need a wind scoop on my car but I'm not going to support a politician who would call a production car with a customized or production wind scoop a formula 1 car. I don't need a pistol grip on my rifle either but I won't support any politician who calls a rifle with a pistol grip an assault rifle.