Hawaii is an extremely anti-gun state, which kind of runs counter to the descriptor of the place as absolute paradise. I mean, if you’re going to restrict my basic rights, how much of a paradise can it be?

Yet in the wake of Bruen, at least some of those anti-gun regulations in the Aloha State are doomed. That’s particularly true with regard to permitting.

Hawaii County just brought their process in line with the ruling.

The department said people who want to apply for a license to carry a concealed or unconcealed firearm must do the following:

• Complete the Hawaii Police Department Application for License to Carry Firearms.
• Pass and submit a firearms proficiency test administered by a certified instructor.
• Submit two front-facing, passport-sized color photographs of the applicant (taken within 30 days prior to submittal of application).
• Turn in a mental health form.
• You must be a resident of the County of Hawaii, have a local address, and be 21 years of age or older.

Applications and supporting documentation may be submitted in person or via mail.

While I disagree with just about every part of that, I think most of it would survive legal scrutiny.

However, not all of it should.

In particular, the mental health form. As we’ve seen, far too many things are disqualifying in the state of Hawaii. Imagine being told you don’t have a right to bear arms simply because you’re homesick. How furious would you be?

But, at least Hawaii County is a bit more in line with Bruen.

Yet it also illustrates how much leeway anti-gun jurisdictions have in the wake of the landmark Supreme Court decision. These are pretty restrictive in and of themselves even without the mental health form.

I mean, can you imagine being denied your right to free speech on the internet unless you could show some degree in accuracy as to what you were saying? I mean, Shannon Watts and David Hogg would be out of a career if that were to happen.

What if journalists were required to show they could accurately report the facts and keep opinion out of their work before they were allowed to serve as members of the press?

OK, so maybe it’s not all bad.

Seriously, you don’t see such a requirement with literally any other right. I don’t have to prove I can quote scripture accurately in order to worship as I please, for example, so why is marksmanship a requirement to really exercise your Second Amendment rights?

Well, it’s Hawaii and they don’t like your right to keep and bear arms. They want to make it as restrictive as they can, and this is what they’ve come up with.

It’s also why there’s never any compromise with anti-gunners. They’ll take everything they can and then demand more. It’s only when you refuse to budge anymore that you can stop the push. Even then, they’ll go just as far as they’re able, even if it doesn’t actually do anything for anyone.

I’m glad Hawaii County has made the required changes. I only wish they recognized that many of the things they’re demanding are still problematic when talking about a constitutionally protected right.