10
Loading video...
By James Bickerton
News Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The Supreme Court of Hawaii has ruled a man can be prosecuted for carrying a gun in public without a permit in the state, overturning a lower court ruling that concluded this would violate his rights under the Second Amendment.
Christopher Wilson was charged with keeping a firearm in an improper place and keeping ammunition in an improper place after being arrested on December 7, 2017, in the West Maui Mountains. He was found in possession of a handgun that had been loaded with a 10-round magazine, which he insisted was for self-defense, without a permit as required by state law.
Wilson's legal team moved to dismiss the charges, arguing they violated the Second Amendment in the context of the 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This motion was granted by Hawaii's Circuit Court of the Second Circuit though this was appealed by the state, taking the case to the state's supreme court.
Read More
How Greg Abbott’s Border Fight Bolsters Calls for an Independent Texas17 min read
Missouri Rule Change Would Allow Senators to Challenge Each Other to a Duel4 min read
The Libertarian Who Could Hold the Key to the Senate8 min read
In their appeal, Hawaii authorities argued Wilson "did not bother to apply for a carry license" and thus didn't fulfill the necessary legal requirements under the state's licensed open carry law.
The state supreme court concluded: "We reject Wilson's constitutional challenges. Conventional interpretive modalities and Hawaiʻi's historical tradition of firearm regulation rule out an individual right to keep and bear arms under the Hawaiʻi Constitution. In Hawaiʻi, there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public."
Wilson's attorney, Benjamin Lowenthal, told Newsweek: "There is a lot to go through in the Court's opinion and analysis. My colleagues and I are still studying it, taking stock of our options, and are working on what is best for Mr. Wilson."
In its judgment, the Hawaii Supreme Court said the Second Amendment uses "military-tinged language – 'well regulated militia' and 'bear arms' - to limit the use of deadly weapons to a military purpose."
The court said: "In contrast, there are no words that mention a personal right to possess lethal weapons in public places for possible self-defense.
Posting on X, formerly Twitter, Kostas Moore, an attorney who works with the California Rifle & Pistol Association, opposed this view. He wrote: "Hawaii's Supreme Court rehashes tired collective right arguments which the Supreme Court has expressly rejected, and overwhelming amounts of historical evidence confirm to be false."
The Hawaii Supreme Court referenced the island's history as an independent kingdom, as well as the dramatic improvement in firearm capacity since the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, to justify its ruling. It wrote: "We believe it is a misplaced view to think that today's public safety laws must look like laws passed long ago.
...
"Smoothbore, muzzle-loaded, and power-and-ramrod muskets were not exactly useful to colonial era mass murders. And life is a bit different now, in a nation with a lot more people, stretching to islands in the Pacific Ocean."
The court said: "As the world turns, it makes no sense for contemporary society to pledge allegiance to the founding era's culture, realities, laws, and understanding of the Constitution." This was followed by a quote from the hit HBO show The Wire, stating: "The thing about the old days, they the old days."
Update 2/8/24, 1:27 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with comment from Christopher Wilson's attorney.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines