The following is the exchange with Alan Beck, the counsel of record on a legal challenge to Hawaii’s very restrictive carry laws. The case he argued before the 9th circuit court of appeals was heard the same day as the now announced Peruta carry case.
AP: MR Beck, you are the counsel on a case pending decision before the 9th circuit court of appeals, Christopher Baker v. Louis Kealoha. The oral arguments were heard the same day as another case where the decision was recently announced, Peruta v. San Diego.
Can you give me a thumbnail description of your case, and do you have any thoughts, comments, or observations on Peruta, and how it may affect your case?
BECK: Baker primarily focused on Hawaii’s handgun carry statute (134-9). The Ninth Circuit’s analysis in Peruta will be applied to the City and County of Honolulu or the State of Hawaii as a whole via Baker. Baker also challenged Hawaii’s complete ban on electric guns and the carry of batons. These issues are unique to Baker and Peruta’s holding has no bearing on them.
AP: What is the current state of firearms ownership& carry in Hawaii? Is there currently any form of carry that is legal& available to the people of the state?
BECK: Hawaii is a complete ban on the carry of handguns. As there are no active permits, no guidelines as how one would issue a permit and the handful of permits rumored to have been issued in the history of the state were issued based on cronyism. Whether permits actually were issued is a subject of speculation as no evidence as ever been produced that a County (island) has issued.
AP: Do you have any other cases that you are working on? What issues do you think are ripe for strategic litigation?
BECK: I am working on two other Second Amendment cases and one First Amendment case which is of interest to Second Amendment supporters. Up on appeal to the Ninth is Young v. State of Hawaii which asks the Court to define the extent the Second Amendment protects the carry of rifles, shotguns and knives for the Ninth. It also argues how and why magazines and ammunition are protected by the Second Amendment. Additionally the constitutionality of short barrel shotguns and short barrel rifles is argued.
I am a friend of the Court in Fisher v. Kealoha which ultimately argues the burden is on the government to show a person has been convicted of domestic violence. The Court has ruled in our favor on that issue and the case is awaiting a full trial as the Court asks Mr. Fisher to show he no longer suffers from alcohol issues.
Finally I am working on a first amendment case which will defend the right of Ares Arms to maintain a sign which advertises their business and their fidelity to the Second Amendment. National City (where the store is located) is demanding that the store tear the sign down.
AP: SCOTUS just denied a petition for cert for 2 challenges of provisions to the Gun Control Act of 1968, do you think those challenges were well structured, or should they have focused on a different aspect of the GCA68?
What effect do you see your case& Peruta having on carry in other venues in the nation, Guam for example? Do you see this case increasing the likelihood of SCOTUS granting cert on the carry case out of NJ; DRAKE v. FILKO?
BECK: Peruta has created a Circuit split which means a carry case will likely be granted in the near future. Prior to the Peruta ruling I would have guessed Drake would not be granted cert. Now I believe it will be due to the Circuit split.
The territories are an interesting story. Guam actually has constitutional carry laws due to virtually unrestricted open carry. However the North Marinas Islands (Saipan) and America Samoa both has complete bans on even handgun ownership 6 years post Heller. SAF via its member Gray Peterson and its attorney David Sigale is planning a challenge to Saipan’s laws alongside local counsel. I am planning a challenge to America Samoa’s laws which will likely be filed subsequent and independent of that case. Donation to the Saipan project via SAF will expedite both cases being filed. As these are the last two places in the nation with complete bans on handguns (along with most rifles and shotgun) this is a worthy cause which I hope the various individuals involved will be able to address soon.
AP: you mentioned a first amendment case, If I understand the outline of this case, there was an existing commercial building that has been standing for over 100years, with a billboard on top of said building since the 1920’s, which predates the city’s sign regulations by quite a bit. This was a selling point for when your clients purchased the building. Shortly after the new owners moved in, they papered the billboard with a graphic showing an AR-15, which resulted in a nastygram from the Mayor’s office instructing them to remove the sign within a very short period of time.
While I am not a lawyer, to me this seems problematic on many levels.
To be continued. . .
The Armoured Porcupine 
The 9th circuit judges gave what is by the legal definition of infringement a long list of unconstitutional laws that limit gun rights that they based their decision on. Saying that since these laws had all been on the books then what HI is doing to violate people’s rights is okay. So does that mean if a state were to decide to bring back slavery or segregation that would be okay as well, since it was law in a bunch of states at one time? That’s an extreme example but it’s doing the same thing. It’s taking away the rights of people without due process. Every Amendment in the Bill of Rights is just as important as the other. It long past time for those the believe they are above us to think otherwise.