In recent decades, laws in many states have changed to permit more and more people to carry guns in public places — in plain view.

Thirty-one states now allow the open carrying of a handgun without any license or permit, although in some cases the gun must be unloaded. Hawaii is among 15 that require a license or permit for “open carry.” And five states and Washington, D.C. ban the practice.

State law limits our county police chiefs to issuing open-carry permits in “exceptional” cases involving people “engaged in the protection of life and property,” which has so far been largely restricted to security guards. That high bar surely serves us well as Hawaii is ranked among the states with the lowest levels of gun violence nationwide.

But a courtroom challenge now in the works — brought by George Young Jr., a Vietnam veteran and former law enforcement officer at Hilo International Airport — aims to loosen Hawaii’s open-carry practice. Such a move holds the potential to make the islands a more dangerous place to live. It should be vigorously opposed by Hawaii County and the state.

Last week, a three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that Young’s rights under the U.S. Constitution were violated when he was denied a permit to carry a gun in public for self-defense, reversing a lower court ruling in favor of the state’s stance that the Second Amendment rights in question apply only to guns kept in homes.

A decade ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment grants individuals the right to keep firearms in their homes — although not without limits. Prior to that, courts held that the matter pertained largely to state militias, not personal protection.

The ruling in Young’s case asserts that most of us should be allowed to own and carry firearms for the sake of our own protection openly in public places as well as in our homes. However, the court did acknowledge that the right should be subject to some regulation, such as prohibiting firearms in schools or government buildings.

Young has said he sees an open-carry permit as a sensible layer of personal protection, “a matter of having (a firearm) available if and when I need it, in the car or someplace where it’s convenient for self-defense.” The Hawaii Rifle Association echoes that wrong-headed argument.

There’s no denying that the open presence of guns in public life can escalate everyday conflicts into senseless deadly altercations. It’s also important to keep in mind that in addition to homicides, gun violence includes accidents and suicides. Well over half of the firearm deaths across the country are suicides.

Hawaii has the fourth-lowest gun violence rate nationwide — and the state’s tight grip on open-carry practice contributes to that ranking. Our tough gun control laws rightly aim to keep us safe.

For example, in 2016 Hawaii became the first state to initiate entering gun owners into an FBI database that automatically notifies police if a Hawaii resident is arrested anywhere else in the country.

Critics have argued that gun owners shouldn’t have to be entered in a database for practicing a constitutional right. Outweighing that concern, though, are matters of community safety, with law enforcement agencies better able to protect the public.

In response to the Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, Hawaii County should quickly file a petition seeking a broader appellate view. There’s reason to be optimistic that an rehearing including the 11 other 9th Circuit justices could overturn last week’s ruling.

Four years ago, the judge who wrote the majority opinion in Young’s case came to a similar conclusion in a challenge regarding whether individuals have a right to carry a concealed weapon. The decision was overturned in an en banc hearing.

If an appeal effort fails, Hawaii’s state lawmakers must re-craft the open-carry law so that it’s as strict as possible, within legal boundaries.