Supreme Court, Hawaii can't ban concealed carry on private property

[2aguy]

Of course, the democrat party Justices voted as a block again.....but they couldn't stop the Constitutional Justices from ruling correctly on this issue....

======
The Supreme Court on Thursday invalidated Hawaii’s gun restrictions on private property in a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, ruling it violates the constitutional right to bear arms.

Justice Samuel Alito agreed with gun rights advocates that the state can’t block handgun possession on private property by default unless someone receives the owner’s express consent.

“This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Alito wrote.
======

Supreme Court Strikes Down This Hawaii Anti-Gun Bill That Targeted Concealed Carry Holders

Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii law barring concealed carry on private property, affirming 2nd Amendment rights.

townhall.com

 

[rightwinger]

So if you want to conceal carry in a bar or place where alcohol is served, the state can’t stop you

 

[2aguy]

So if you want to conceal carry in a bar or place where alcohol is served, the state can’t stop you

I don't know if it addresses that.

 

[2aguy]

So if you want to conceal carry in a bar or place where alcohol is served, the state can’t stop you

So if you want to conceal carry in a bar or place where alcohol is served, the state can’t stop you

Here is the actual ruling...

=========
For years, the State of Hawaii made it almost impossible to obtain a li-

cense to carry a firearm. Four years ago, however, this Court held in

New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. 1, that the

Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to carry hand-

guns outside the home for self-defense. Hawaii responded by replacing

its old law on carry permits with new laws that achieved a similar re-

sult. At issue in this case is a Hawaii law that prohibits firearms on

private property open to the public without the express and affirmative

consent of the property owner. Hawaii’s new rule imposes severe re-

strictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the

State’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit. When

these permit holders leave home, not only must they take care to avoid

all the territory where the possession of a gun is prohibited outright,

but they may also be barred from entering many places that people

routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas sta-

tions, restaurants, and stores. This law flips the default rule at com-

mon law, under which anyone has an implied license to enter property

held open to the public unless the property owner withdraws consent.
========

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1046_nmio.pdf

 

[August West]

So if you want to conceal carry in a bar or place where alcohol is served, the state can’t stop you

Alcohol and guns, what could possibly go wrong?

Parks bar shooting victim files lawsuit, claims security lapses at Niki’s Quick Six

A man who police said was wounded as he attempted to intervene in an alleged assault outside of a Parks bar in April has filed a lawsuit against the accused shooter as well as the business, claiming it was negligent and unsafe. In an 11-count lawsuit filed Friday in Westmoreland

triblive.com

 

[2aguy]

Alcohol and guns, what could possibly go wrong?

Parks bar shooting victim files lawsuit, claims security lapses at Niki’s Quick Six

A man who police said was wounded as he attempted to intervene in an alleged assault outside of a Parks bar in April has filed a lawsuit against the accused shooter as well as the business, claiming it was negligent and unsafe. In an 11-count lawsuit filed Friday in Westmoreland

triblive.com

Dumb shit, I don't see anything about that in this ruling. And nothing you believe about guns is true or factual, in fact, the opposite is usually true.

Meanwhile, in the real world, allowing people to go into bars with their guns, but not drinking, has reduced violence at bars.

From Chat GPT:

========

• South Carolina changed its law in 2014 to allow permit holders to carry in establishments serving alcohol if they did not drink and if the business didn't prohibit firearms.
• After the change, opponents predicted more shootings, while supporters pointed out that such shootings did not materialize at the levels predicted.
• Tennessee passed a law in 2009 allowing handgun permit holders to carry in restaurants and bars that serve alcohol, provided the carrier was not drinking. Supporters later pointed to the absence of a surge in bar violence as evidence the law was safe.
• Texas has long allowed licensed carry in many establishments that serve alcohol, though not in businesses where more than 51% of revenue comes from alcohol sales ("51% establishments," essentially bars). Some advocates cited falling crime trends after expansions of carry rights, but researchers disagreed about whether the gun laws caused the decline.
• ==========

 

[2aguy]

Alcohol and guns, what could possibly go wrong?

Parks bar shooting victim files lawsuit, claims security lapses at Niki’s Quick Six

A man who police said was wounded as he attempted to intervene in an alleged assault outside of a Parks bar in April has filed a lawsuit against the accused shooter as well as the business, claiming it was negligent and unsafe. In an 11-count lawsuit filed Friday in Westmoreland

triblive.com

More from Chat GPT:

he short answer is: there is not strong evidence that states allowing licensed people to carry firearms in bars or restaurants serving alcohol experienced a clear increase in gun violence because of those laws. But there is also not strong evidence that the laws reduced gun violence.

The best recent national study (published in 2026) examined states that adopted so-called "bar ban" laws (laws prohibiting firearms where alcohol is served) and found that adopting those restrictions produced no discernible change in shootings near alcohol-serving establishments.

On the other hand, a 2024 Texas study found that bars where firearms were prohibited under Texas's "51% law" experienced fewer shootings nearby than otherwise similar establishments where firearms were allowed. The researchers estimated about 37% fewer shootings within 50 meters of gun-prohibited bars, although they cautioned that the study was observational and could not definitively prove causation.

 

[August West]

I have no respect for gun pussies who are afraid to leave home without their gun tucked in their bra. How much money have you spent on guns and how many bad guys have you dropped? Most of my fellow steelworkers owned guns for hunting and/or home protection, but cowboy wannabes were rare.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Alcohol and guns, what could possibly go wrong?

Parks bar shooting victim files lawsuit, claims security lapses at Niki’s Quick Six

A man who police said was wounded as he attempted to intervene in an alleged assault outside of a Parks bar in April has filed a lawsuit against the accused shooter as well as the business, claiming it was negligent and unsafe. In an 11-count lawsuit filed Friday in Westmoreland

triblive.com

Look at you - unable to address the issue, so you try to change the subject.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I have no respect for gun pussies ....

**** off.

 

[Lockback]

Of course, the democrat party Justices voted as a block again.....but they couldn't stop the Constitutional Justices from ruling correctly on this issue....

======
The Supreme Court on Thursday invalidated Hawaii’s gun restrictions on private property in a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, ruling it violates the constitutional right to bear arms.

Justice Samuel Alito agreed with gun rights advocates that the state can’t block handgun possession on private property by default unless someone receives the owner’s express consent.

“This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Alito wrote.
======

Supreme Court Strikes Down This Hawaii Anti-Gun Bill That Targeted Concealed Carry Holders

Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii law barring concealed carry on private property, affirming 2nd Amendment rights.

townhall.com

Yet another excellent decision by the Supreme Court.

 

[August West]

**** off.

Get your gun, shoot the computer screen and feel manly.

 

[Dante]

So if you want to conceal carry in a bar or place where alcohol is served, the state can’t stop you

Forget the OP's Townhall article(s) on this.

Holding​

Hawaii’s law prohibiting licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the property owner’s express authorization violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.

Wolford v. Lopez (24-1046)

Hawaii’s law prohibiting licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the property owner’s express authorization violates the Second a…

www.scotusblog.com

 

[M14 Shooter]

Of course, the democrat party Justices voted as a block again.....but they couldn't stop the Constitutional Justices from ruling correctly on this issue....

And, in their dissent, they choose to lie about the issue.

 For what it is worth, I think Bruen was wrongly decided. But if it is going to be our precedent, the majority should at least endeavor to apply it faithfully. I respectfully dissent because the majority has failed to do so here, and its analysis and conclusion only further bind the hands of modern legislatures attempting to balance and protect their residents’ interests. With this decision, the Court has now manipulated Bruen into a free-for-all that lets the Judiciary thwart the will of legislatures by privileging access to firearms above all else. Today’s decision makes one thing clear: The Court’s objective is protecting guns, not consistently preserving any principle of law.

WOLFORD v. LOPEZ

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Dante]

Yet another excellent decision by the Supreme Court.

What is interesting is the divided court. This court majority has seemed to ignore precedent(s). So...

 

[Dante]

And, in their dissent, they choose to lie about the issue.

 For what it is worth, I think Bruen was wrongly decided. But if it is going to be our precedent, the majority should at least endeavor to apply it faithfully. I respectfully dissent because the majority has failed to do so here, and its analysis and conclusion only further bind the hands of modern legislatures attempting to balance and protect their residents’ interests. With this decision, the Court has now manipulated Bruen into a free-for-all that lets the Judiciary thwart the will of legislatures by privileging access to firearms above all else. Today’s decision makes one thing clear: The Court’s objective is protecting guns, not consistently preserving any principle of law.

WOLFORD v. LOPEZ

www.law.cornell.edu

Why do you lie here?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Get your gun, shoot the computer screen and feel manly.

I have a better idea:

Goodby, Junior.

 

[Lockback]

And, in their dissent, they choose to lie about the issue.

 For what it is worth, I think Bruen was wrongly decided. But if it is going to be our precedent, the majority should at least endeavor to apply it faithfully. I respectfully dissent because the majority has failed to do so here, and its analysis and conclusion only further bind the hands of modern legislatures attempting to balance and protect their residents’ interests. With this decision, the Court has now manipulated Bruen into a free-for-all that lets the Judiciary thwart the will of legislatures by privileging access to firearms above all else. Today’s decision makes one thing clear: The Court’s objective is protecting guns, not consistently preserving any principle of law.

WOLFORD v. LOPEZ

www.law.cornell.edu

Typical leftists doing their best to disarm Americans.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Typical leftists doing their best to disarm Americans.

Any and every chance they get.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

MSN

Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii's 'vampire rule' for gun owners​

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a Hawaii gun restriction that limits when people can carry firearms on certain private properties open to the public, saying it infringes on the right to bear arms.
On a 6-3 vote, the court invalidated the measure that requires people with concealed carry permits to seek permission from a property owner before entering. It has been dubbed the "vampire rule" because, as in the classic novel "Dracula" and related tales, vampires can only enter someone's home if they are invited in.

The whole point of conceal carry is to make it hard for criminals and democrats to know how is carrying lawfully and who isnt. We know mentally ill democrats never follow the law, while the everyday Joe Plumber who is working hard for family and country, should be allowed to have the ability to defend himself from said democrats.
So the best way to slay a democrat is with TRUTH and GARLIC. And maybe a stake through the heart if being attacked by the vampire.