Firearm Instructors: HPD’s Hidden Secret?

from HiFiCo, Feb 12, 2026 

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Hawaiʻi Legislature made significant changes to our state’s firearms laws. Among those changes was a requirement that firearm instructors in Hawaiʻi be approved by the county police departments.

This created a formal approval system for the individuals responsible for providing mandatory training to law-abiding residents.

Shortly after the law took effect, the Honolulu Police Department implemented its instructor approval process. For a brief period, a list of approved instructors appeared on HPD’s website. Then, without explanation, it disappeared.

No notice. No public statement. It was simply removed.

That left residents seeking lawful training with no independent way to confirm who was approved. When the government requires training in order to exercise a constitutional right, access to accurate information about approved instructors should be straightforward.

When we requested a copy of the list, HPD declined, stating that it contained private information. That response was difficult to reconcile with the fact that these are instructors officially authorized by the department to provide required certification courses.

We filed a request under Hawaiʻi’s Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA). Eventually, the department provided a version of the list — but it was oddly redacted. Some information was withheld while similar information elsewhere was not. The redactions appeared inconsistent, raising more questions than they answered.

Now, nearly two years later, we have requested the list again.

Despite previously providing the document, and despite the clear public interest in knowing who is approved to provide mandatory instruction, HPD has once again required a formal UIPA process, resulting in additional delay.

Hawaiʻi does not maintain secret lists of approved plumbers. We do not hide the names of licensed electricians, contractors, or builders. When the government establishes a licensing or approval system for professionals, that information is typically public and easily accessible. The same principle should apply here.

In fact, Hawaiʻi’s public records law is built on a presumption of openness. The Uniform Information Practices Act makes clear that government records should be accessible unless a specific exemption clearly applies. A list of individuals approved by the government to provide mandatory instruction would appear to fall squarely within the type of information that should be publicly available and easy to locate — not something that requires repeated formal requests and waiting periods.

All we are requesting is a list of the names and businesses of instructors who have been approved to teach required courses under Hawaiʻi law. This is not investigative material. It is not confidential tactical information. It is a roster of individuals the government has authorized to provide mandated instruction to the public.

When the state creates an approval system tied directly to the exercise of a constitutional right, the public should be able to easily verify who is approved. Making that information readily accessible benefits everyone — students, instructors, and the department itself.

Transparency builds trust. It prevents confusion. It ensures residents can confidently comply with the law.

The list of approved instructors should not require repeated public records requests. It should be published clearly and consistently so that residents seeking lawful training can easily find accurate information.

For that reason, Hawaiʻi Firearms Coalition has filed another request under the Uniform Information Practices Act to obtain the current list of approved instructors, and we will make it publicly available as soon as we receive it.

The public should not have to navigate bureaucracy to find basic compliance information. If the only way to keep this list accurate and up to date is to submit a UIPA request every week, then that is exactly what we will do. Transparency should not depend on persistence — but if persistence is required, we are prepared to provide it.