Lawsuit Filed in Hawaii Over Denial of 'Right to Concealed Carry'
By George K. Young Jr., 9/24/2007 3:00:44 PM
On Aug. 24, 2007, I filed a civil lawsuit in the United States Federal District Court for the District of Hawaii, CV 07-00450HG/KSC. The purpose of the lawsuit is to seek damages, under 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985, and 1986, for denying and prohibiting the free exercise of my Second Amendment Right.
On three previous ocassions, I have applied for either a concealed or unconcealed permit to carry a firearm and was denied. Since no attorney in the State of Hawaii is willing to take this case, I filed Pro Se.
The Defendants are the state of Hawaii and Gov. Linda Lingle; Mark Bennett, State Attorney General; County of Hawaii and Mayor Harry Kim; the Hawaii Police Department and Chief of Police Lawrence Mahuna.
I am suing for violation of:
* a. U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 10: "No State shall pass any Bill of Attainder."
* b. U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 10: "No State shall pass any ...law Impairing the Obligation of Contract.
* c. U.S. Constitution, Amendment II: "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."
* d. U.S. Constitution, Amendment IX: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
* e. U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV: "...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of CITIZENS of the United States..."
The Hawaii County Corporation Counsel, on 15 September 2007, initiated a "Motion to Dismiss" based on the following: "2. Young's lack of facts to support a cognizable legal theory also mandates dismissal of his Complaint. Young has no Second Amendment right to bear arms ... "the Second Amendment guarantees a "collective" rather than an individual right.
"Moreover, since the Second Amendment protects the people's right to maintain an effective state militia, and does not establish an individual right to own or possess firearms for personal or other use, Young lacks standing to challenge Section 134, HRS."
U.S. District Court Judge Helen Gilmore will hear the motion scheduled for Nov. 13, 2007.
It has become very apparent that the people of Hawaii, especially gun owners, should be made aware that they have now "lost" their constitutional right.
First, the implementation of "reasonable" laws; permit to acquire with photo and fingerprints; then waiting periods; then registration; then place to keep; and now ...no right to own or possess. Socialism, has now come to full circle to exist fully unrestrained here in Hawaii.
What is troubling, is how do you amend the Hawaii Constitution, Article 17 Bill of Rights, to which the Second Amendment was incorporated verbatim, under the assertion that it was an "individual right" in 1959?
The language is the same, how the meaning and purpose for which it was passed has now changed, without the permission of "...we the people". It is now the "...tail wagging the dog." The servant is now master. That which is Supreme is inferior. In other words, "...we now have a bastardized version of the U.S. Constitution."
:banghead:
