Many people rely on implements like stun guns and Tasers for their daily self-defense needs, either as an alternative or a complement to firearms. It is strange to consider that such tools could be subject to bans when guns are not, but some jurisdictions in the United States have ruled that they are not protected by the Second Amendment.
Law professor Eugene Volokh recently wrote an amicus brief to support a writ of certiorari for the Massachusetts Supreme Court, which ruled in March that stun guns are “dangerous and unusual weapons” and thus not covered.
Frequent A1F contributor Frank Miniter provides a good summary on this issue in a new Forbespiece, but the upshot is that the fight over “non-lethal” or “less-lethal” defenses is heating up nationwide. Volokh posits that the U.S. Supreme Court may hear the Massachusetts case, Commonwealth v. Caetano, this fall.