Swearer: This Is Why Hawaii Should Rethink Its View of Second Amendment

Every day in the United States, someone uses a gun for self-defense. Most of the time, these never make the news. They either draw it and scare off the bad guy, or they’re used against an animal or something else that isn’t interesting to journalists. Either way, they use them, they protect themselves, then they go on about their day.

The state of Hawaii would have you believe, though, that armed citizens aren’t protecting themselves. They want you to think that people who carry guns are a threat and need to be excluded.

Over at our sister site, PJ Media, Amy Swearer thinks Hawaii should do some rethinking on that.

The Supreme Court’s most recent term ended earlier this summer with an important victory for the Second Amendment in Wolford v. Lopez, where a 6-3 majority struck down a Hawaii law that made it all but impossible for the state’s concealed carry permit holders to exercise their Second Amendment rights outside of their homes. The Court held that the statute—which presumptively banned lawfully armed citizens from entering any store or business without express permission from the owner—was inconsistent with any historical national tradition of firearms regulation. The opinion was a small but important step toward ensuring that all Americans enjoy equal and full access to the right to keep and bear arms. 

…

Concerned Hawaiians should know, however, that they have nothing to fear and much to gain from embracing the Second Amendment. The most recent report on the issue by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention acknowledged that almost every study on the issue has found that between 500,000 and several million defensive gun uses occur every year in the United States. An extensive 2021 national survey conducted by a Georgetown professor further substantiated this reality, concluding that Americans used their firearms defensively an average of 1.2 million times a year. Below are just a few examples of successful defensive gun uses that occurred in June, many of which went largely unnoticed by the American public:

She then goes on, as she does each month, to list a number of defensive gun uses that did make the news, including one from June 17th that happened in my neck of the woods. 

Swearer notes that the decision in Wolford is, to some degree, a limited victory, but she also points out that good guys with guns save lives. They allow armed citizens to meet the threats posed by truly dangerous people and protect others. It’s happened numerous times, and we’ve highlighted many of them, but we’ve barely scratched the surface.

In her monthly listings, Swearer doesn’t pretend she’s providing a comprehensive list, because such a thing is virtually impossible. She’s providing examples, but there are hundreds of others each month that she’s completely unaware of, as he indicates above.

The truth is, though, that most defensive gun uses never make national news. They’re local stories, at best. Part of that is because they’re so common that even someone like Newsmax or One America couldn’t cover each one without having no time to cover anything else happening in the world. 

According to the Gun Violence Archive (yeah, I know, but work with me for a minute), there were 38,797 people shot by a third party in 2025. I excluded suicides and officer-involved shootings. I also didn’t look at the site’s defensive gun use numbers because, frankly, they’re useless. If I had, though, and counted each as a shooting, it would lower the number.

But, as noted by Swearer, the low count for defensive gun uses isn’t the thousand or so GVA cites. No, actual studies of the subject range between half a million and several million defensive gun uses each year. 

“If it saves one life…” is a common enough justification for gun control, but I reject it. Not because I object to saving lives, but because there’s a balance to be considered. Is saving one innocent life worthwhile if it costs 10 others their lives? Objectively, no. Sure, if it’s your loved one, the math works out differently, but that’s neither here nor there. 

Lawmakers in Hawaii, though, see armed citizens not as a force for good. They think that if they save one life, it’s worthwhile, even as they ignore the 10 others as irrelevant.

That’s not compassion. That’s not empathy. That’s not valuing human life.

At its best, it’s ignorance. At its worst, it’s evil.

Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.