Courts Weigh Whether Stun Guns Are Covered By Second Amendment

posted on August 14, 2015

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 Forbes piece, 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.

Latest

oregonflg.jpg
oregonflg.jpg

What’s Next for Oregon?

When a circuit court judge imposed a permanent injunction against Oregon’s anti-freedom measure last week, it was just the latest skirmish in a year-long, up-and-down battle against the sweeping, poorly conceived law.

The Armed Citizen® December 4, 2023

True stories of the right to keep and bear arms.

NRA 2023 Year In Review

None of this would be possible without the enduring support of NRA members.

A Fact Check of Gov. Newsom and Gov. DeSantis on Crime and Guns

To paraphrase the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, they are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.

Montana’s AG Explains Why NRA v. Vullo is a Critical Supreme Court Case

“Government should not be able to come in and act like the mafia,” says Montana Attorney General Knudsen.

Interests



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.