In a somewhat byzantine tangle of legal events, the state of Hawaii may have figuratively shot itself in the foot.

In 2014, a divided three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court held that it was unconstitutional to prohibit concealed pistol carry. That decision was appealed and in an 11-judge en banc (full court) 7-4 decision on June 9, 2016, the court reversed its earlier decision. Thus, pending review by the U.S. Supreme Court, the law of the land at this moment is that individual states may prohibit citizens’ concealed weapon carry without violating their rights under the Second Amendment.

Hawaii currently restricts the “bearing” of weapons exclusively to the home, place of business and firearms ranges, reasoning that such restrictions are consistent with the provisions of the Second Amendment because the amendment neither specifically allows nor prohibits bearing of arms in public. Hawaii has no real problem with citizens possessing weapons of defense, as long as they are not borne in public.

Well, now the issue is open carry — the carrying of pistols in plain view — and the court, and states like Hawaii, have found that they have backed themselves into a corner. Because if it’s constitutional to prohibit concealed carry as the 9th Circuit Court has ruled, and the Second Amendment grants the right to “bear” arms (which means to have on one’s person), then it has to be unconstitutional to similarly prohibit open carry, because to ban both concealed and open carry directly contravenes the U.S. Constitution — which takes precedence over state laws.

Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution, commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause, establishes that the federal Constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. Hawaii accepted those provisions when it became the 50th state of the union.

Accordingly, the 9th Circuit Court, again in a three-judge panel, ruled on July 24 that Hawaii’s laws prohibiting open carry are unconstitutional. Because of that decision, the law of the land now is that states may prohibit concealed carry but not open carry. The consequence is that Hawaii, in a misguided effort to keep guns off the streets, may soon be forced to accept citizens strolling down the street with pistols in plain view on their hips, ala the Old West.

How is that better than citizens carrying concealed pistols, where no one is the wiser and therefore there are no gasps of horror and clutching of pearls?

Hawaii, of course, has desperately appealed that July ruling and has filed for an 11-judge en banc review of the earlier decision on open carry. If the full court reverses the earlier ruling, as it did with the concealed carry decision, the 9th Circuit Court will have de facto determined that it is constitutional to ban both concealed and open carry, in effect rendering the Second Amendment null and void.

That decision would be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court where, I predict, the court will rule that Hawaii’s total ban on concealed and open carrying (bearing) a gun on one’s person for the purpose of self-defense contravenes the Second Amendment, at which point Hawaii will probably hurriedly craft new laws that circumvent the court’s ruling, and continue to restrict the bearing of arms to police, security guards and criminals. And someone will challenge that policy, and the legal circus will continue.

The issue is not whether the prohibition against carrying guns on one’s person outside the home makes Hawaii a safer place; it probably does. The issue is whether the state’s laws are subject to overrule by the Constitution. Until the Second Amendment or Article VI Paragraph 2 are repealed, they are.

Dick Porter is a retired Navy captain and former Lockheed Martin executive involved in ship design and construction projects in Hawaii.