You know what REALLY bugs me about the government lately? Now mind you, this is my perception, which may be skewed.

Representatives are there to REPRESENT their constituents. Lately, though, it seems less and less like they're doing that, and instead knee-jerking to a "crisis" and doing things to get re-elected. This happens despite often clear evidence that the general public doesn't agree with them.

Honestly, I really think we should wipe the slate clean and start over (meaning get rid of current government officials, not something catastrophic). Kind of like Tom Clancy did in his books when Ryan became president.

This was posted on the Knife Rights site and sent out to members this evening:

Hawaiian State Senator Introduces Pocket Knife Ban Bill

For those who claim that we are paranoid, I present Hawaii Senate Bill 126. It was introduced last week by Democratic Senator Les Ihara and would ban the manufacturing, transfer, sale, possession or transportation of folding knives "suitable for carrying in the pocket."

You can review the full bill as proposed here: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2009/bills/SB126_.htm

Being somewhat gracious, one might conclude that Senator Ihara is seriously misguided and the more widespread presumption by many in online forum posts is that he is an idiot. The reality is that he's just being a politician. Still, the fact remains that this is symptomatic of attacks on our knife rights of which we can expect to see more in coming years. You’re not paranoid if they really are trying to get you.

In fairness, it should be noted that this bill was introduced "by request," meaning that it was at the request of a constituent, not a piece of legislation developed by the Senator. Many such bills, often of questionable value and support, are introduced every year in legislatures throughout the U.S. as a means to gain points and votes, often with little or no thought given by the legislator and knowing that they probably will not go very far. I contacted Sen. Ihara's office and was told that the bill was introduced just as a courtesy for his constituent and that Sen. Ihara did not support the bill, nor do they expect it to reach the floor for a vote. I have emailed the Senator to get a personal statement of his position, but as of this evening had not yet received a response.

However, the Senator is under no obligation to submit radical legislation such as this and in my opinion it should never have seen the light of day. It is imperative that Senator Ihara understand that knife owners do not take such things lightly. The knife industry and knife owners are up in arms over this bill. Many of you have already emailed or called after notices were posted on various online forums. While this is not an organized grassroots response, it’s a beginning. You can find a mailing address and phone number at: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/site1/senate/members/Sen9.asp

While it may feel good to launch into an invective-filled tirade, those don't accomplish much. If you're going to write, make a reasoned argument. We want him to know that the next time a constituent tries this; he should just say "no," because that's the right thing to do.

It's not likely that such a radical bill as this would actually make it through the legislative process at the current time. However, we also cannot overlook the possibility that some future tragedy might occur that helps this bill or another one in a similar vein to garner popular support and traction in the media. A less radical proposal could be another story, especially given changing attitudes and political climate. How much of your rights would others not mind trampling upon?

Perhaps this bill will serve as a wake-up call for those who maintain it could never happen here. We must maintain our guard and gird ourselves for a continuing fight. It isn't a question of "if," it's only a matter of when and where.

Doug Ritter
Chairman / CEO
Knife Rights, Inc.
Knife Rights Foundation, Inc.
www.KnifeRights.org
Email: dritter@KnifeRights.org

Mahalo Doug.

Your contacting Senator Ihara representing Knife Rights means a lot to me personally. I appreciate it.

Senator Ihara emailed the following response to Knife Rights' concerns about SB 126:

From: "Sen. Les Ihara, Jr." <senihara@Capitol.hawaii.gov>
To: Doug Ritter <dritter@KnifeRights.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:23:12 -1000
Subject: RE: SB 126

Doug: I am opposed to SB 126 and would vote against it if I ever voted on it. Because the Hawaii constitution allows only legislators to introduce bills, my policy has been to introduce bills on behalf of my constituents whenever requested. But if I cannot support a constituent bill, I sign it "by request" which signals to other senators that I am not requesting a public hearing for it. I believe this is a common view of many in the legislature, except for the senate president who introduce all Executive and Judiciary Branch bills "by request" though she may support some of them.

In my 22 years in the Hawaii Legislature, I have signed many constituent bills "by request", but I may now reconsider this policy and possibly refuse to introduce a constituent's bill in extreme situations (such as SB 126). Thank you for your inquiry and for helping to inspire the several hundred emails I received opposing SB 126. I am encouraged for our democracy by seeing so many people interested in public policy issues.

Aloha,
LES IHARA, JR.
Hawaii State Senator, 9th District
Senate Majority Policy Leader

IMHO his policy of submiting anything someone send to him needs to be thought out a bit better. I can see how he would want to submit anything so no one can come back and say he refused to represent them but I think he need to take a more careful look at what he submits first. I wonder if he would tell who requested it?

Nice to have him actually respond back on this issue.

People, An elected representative of the people has an ethical obligation to respond to his constituents, even when they are in disagreement.Now, suppose Aloha asked him to present a bill REQUIRING every able bodies Hawaiian to carry a emergency belt cutter, glass breaking knife?

The policy Sen Ihara describes is fairly common across state legislatures around the U.S. - in most cases it upholds a tradition of access, if not influence, over legislative affairs, and allows participation by minority or unpopular points of view. Remember the saying, I oppose what you say, but will fight to the death for the right for you to say it. This is a hopefully less violent variant of the same. Politics - tis the season. The corollary to the quip that all that is necessary for evil to win is for good men to do nothing is that all that is necessary for bad legislation to die is for good men to do as little as possible. Good men tend to respond to bills going no where with dignity and rationality. Don't let your outrage get out of whack, or focus on the messenger - the senator is doing his job, representing his constituents but also signalling his dissent from his own bill by a common practice. Spend an hour or two on your local legislature's website where bills are introduced and tracked, you'll find lots of stuff there going no where, bound to enrage somebody.

I'm reminded of an old boss of mine, who with his wife had to bury two sons - one died of an illness, the other was mugged and died of his stab wounds under an overpass in Portland. Burying two sons - it was hard, you don't expect to do that in life. He never did, but if he wanted to introduce by request legislation and try to convince people to outlaw knives, I for one wouldn't have the heart to say no. I couldn't vote for it, and would work the courts to reverse it if ever passed, but you let some folks have their lead.

I'm also reminded of the line from Charlie Wilson's War, "$5,000 a year earns you the right to call me Charlie once a year. $10,000 earns you the right to call me Mary Lou and have me come over and clean out your gutters."

I think thats where the Senator could have used some better judgement, if someone makes a request like that explain to them that it would never pass so why cause people to just get mad.
What if your box wanted to introduce legislation outlawing the illness that took the first son, would you submit that?

It didn't. It wasn't even seriously proposed (eg in Parliment, or by a politician who could actually do something about it); it was just a crazy idea from a doctor put out to draw attention to some report or other, which the media picked up on and sensationalised in order to provoke their readership. British law is quite specific that short, folding knives are de-facto tools rather than weapons.