Hawaii’s modern gun-control narrative traces back to its monarchy and, in doing so underscores the very principle behind the Second Amendment. Firearms first entered the islands under Kamehameha the Great, who acquired them from foreigners and used them to conquer rival chiefs and consolidate power. Fully aware of the advantage weapons had given his dynasty, Kamehameha III later prohibited his subjects from possessing guns. He inherited a kingdom burdened by debt, foreign infiltration, and collapsing natural resources, and responded with policies that caused widespread hardship, including the disastrous Sandalwood tax. His 1833 weapons ban left an increasingly dissatisfied population unarmed and politically powerless, setting the conditions for unrest and ultimately for a people unable to resist misrule or foreign domination. The lesson is a familiar one: disarmament has long served those in power, not those governed.
Hawaiʻi has never been big on guns. King Kamehameha III banned the possession of firearms and all deadly weapons in the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1833. Even after the kingdom was overthrown and Hawaiʻi eventually became a state, tight regulations on gun ownership remained. To this day, Hawaiʻi has some of the strictest gun laws — and lowest rates of gun violence — in the nation.
That long legacy of gun control will play a role in the state’s argument before the Supreme Court on Tuesday over a challenge to the constitutionality of a state law that prohibits gun owners from carrying their weapons into private businesses without permission.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs, who are three Maui gun owners and the Hawaiʻi Firearms Coalition, say the law infringes on their clients’ Second Amendment rights by effectively banning guns from most places people go on a daily basis.
By Madeleine Valera
