• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Another ruling declares stun gun bans to be unconstitutional.

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
1. The 2A isn’t just about guns.

2. Why the antis, who fear the lethality of semi-automatic firearms and the numbers of people who can be impacted by a single use of them, would target non-lethal and singe-target weapons like stun-guns is illogical and befuddling.

This is the latest in a series of rulings in many States that undo this bit of leftist inconsistency.

 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,537
Location
here nc
Gotta love US newspeek media...caption under gingerly held device shown in WHIO cited article...
Quote:
FILE- In this May 7, 2008 file photo, a police issued taser is displayed at the Victoria police station in Victoria, British Columbia. On Friday, March 22, 2019 a federal judge has ruled that New York's ban on personal ownership of stun guns is unconstitutional. Friday's ruling by a district judge in Utica, N.Y., is the latest in a series of court decisions that have led to the loosening of restrictions on the weapons in several states. (Jonathan Hayward/The Canadian Press via AP, File) unquote. https://www.whio.com/news/national/judge-says-new-york-stun-gun-ban-unconstitutional/n23jsnkv18tF5KDhgo0dJK/

Surely this US based story could have benefited from a a current US consumer grade stun gun photo...
13574

Guess US newspeek media is outsourcing their fotos now :sleep:
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,507
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Haven't these states learn anything?

The Supreme Court in Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U. S. ____ (2016) unanimously held that:
The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008), and that this “Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750 (2010).
Caetano was all about stun guns.

I have posted this case a number of times on this forum.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
1. From Caetano:

And, commendably, she did so [armed herself] by using a weapon that posed little, if any, danger of permanently harming either herself or the father of her children.
SCOTUS mirrored a point from my OP: Antis should be thrilled that some want to carry stun guns instead of firearms. Don’t they realize that, if they outlaw both, they might actually encourage the illegal carry of firearms??? In for a penny, in for a pound!

2. Laws against carrying knives would seem to be the biggest violators of the ideas in Caetano, yet there does not seem to be the same massive effort to overturn knife-control laws as there is for gun-control laws.

I seem to recall from a few years back an OCer being charged with carrying a knife, since he could not be charged for carrying a gun. IIRC the knife charge was tossed because it was ruled that the stop should never have occurred in the first place because lawful OC does not provide RAS for a detention.

3. What about clubs??? They are clearly bearable arms covered by the 2A.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Also from Caetano and echoing my point about the antis:

Courts should not be in the business of demanding that citizens use more force for self-defense than they are comfortable wielding.
That one court would have had to say this to another is [no pun intended] stunning!
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,507
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Knives like hammers, crowbars, baseball bats and other objects are considered tool, not being designed with an intended purpose of being a weapon. The intended purpose of Firearms is for it to be used as an offensive or defensive weapon.

Many states are removing knives from their criminal statutes. Many states don't have a definition for a knife.
Ohio does not. But, they do have court cases attempting to define certain features of a knife makes it a weapon. In other words, legislating from the bench.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Since laws that ban knives do so because they are weapons, arguing that they are tools works against such laws.

Some knives are designed to be tools, but can be used as weapons. Some knives are designed to be weapons, but can be used as tools.

A quick google search of “combat knife” would quickly establish that knives can be thought of as bearable arms that have a common military purpose.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,537
Location
here nc
Minor research found the case of State v. Huntley, the Supreme Court of North Carolina [1843] found that while a person may open carry any weapon, which is not illegal to own, for any lawful purpose, he or she may not do so in order to terrify or alarm the public. The Court held that though there is no statute prohibiting such carrying; it was a common law offense for which a person could be indicted.

Therefore, the Tarheel state affords it’s citizens case law for the open carry of any legal weapon, so long as you are not carrying it in order to terrify or alarm the public.

While citzen’s are occasional charged by the nice LEs who wish to be PITAs I am unaware [tho do not follow all State judicial proceedings] anybody being actually convicted of the clause or the statutory mandates of households with minors keeping firearms & ammo locked up!
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,537
Location
here nc
Since laws that ban knives do so because they are weapons, arguing that they are tools works against such laws.

Some knives are designed to be tools, but can be used as weapons. Some knives are designed to be weapons, but can be used as tools.

A quick google search of “combat knife” would quickly establish that knives can be thought of as bearable arms that have a common military purpose.
So can a retracticable fountain pen, a tool for all intended purposes, be considered a deadly weapon.

Now we reach the magic word ~ intent!

360M citizens may each have a different intent of the TOOL [your choice eye95] based on their cultural, environment they live in, employment experience, ad nauseam, which makes that particular individual dangerous in our nation’s society carrying their TOOL.

Therefore, this is why most states have ‘you killedmaimed/injured someone’ statutes which do not state methodology of the individual’s attack.

Case in point..the bloke who ran over and killed/injuried citizens with their vehicle behind the vehicle barricades which LEs hadn’t perceived could/would happen!

Same tragic event in Charlotte during the ethnic demo where the woman got killed by being run over!

Bottom line, you can point out this or that TOOL as dangerous if there is intent, but surely the state’s do not need specific statutes for all the TOOLs in use today!
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
657
Location
Kentucky
There are as many different takes on what is a weapon, as there are states.
Example , as far as I am aware, my state is the only one that does not outlaw brass,steel etc knucks outright.

In a SD role ,anything from a gun to a hoola hoop normally is considered a weapon if its being used to attack someone.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The question, though, is whether an item is an arm, from the point of view of the 2A, whose carry as an arm is, therefore, not subject to infringement by laws.

Knives clearly are such arms, their ability to be used as tools notwithstanding. Yet we don’t seem to be fighting anti-knife laws as hard as we do anti-gun laws.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
657
Location
Kentucky
From the 2a viewpoint, anything being carried as a "arm" or weapon , from a sharp stick to a club is d an arm
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
7,537
Location
here nc
Yes, but there are no laws targeting sharp sticks. There are laws targeting knives. We need to be working to strike down those laws too.
shall we chose our battles on the OC forum...i have previously personally stated i don't give a rat's derriere about anything but the unfettered carry of handguns for my SD [and associated discussions, e.g. holster, ammo, etc.]

yes i know, some feel the carry of LG's should be shoved down this county’s & society's throat, but that is a discussion on a forum which facilitates LG discussions, this one doesn’t.

As for the founding father’s written words in the 2A including ‘sharpened sticks’ propensities is absolutely absurd!

Gheee...
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
657
Location
Kentucky
shall we chose our battles on the OC forum...i have previously personally stated i don't give a rat's derriere about anything but the unfettered carry of handguns for my SD [and associated discussions, e.g. holster, ammo, etc.]

yes i know, some feel the carry of LG's should be shoved down this county’s & society's throat, but that is a discussion on a forum which facilitates LG discussions, this one doesn’t.

As for the founding father’s written words in the 2A including ‘sharpened sticks’ propensities is absolutely absurd!

Gheee...

The RTKABA predates the founders constitution or this nation.

At one time sharp sticks were the ultimate in weaponry and are included in the term " arms " which covers everything from war machines to yes sharp sticks.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,507
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
The RTKABA predates the founders constitution or this nation.

At one time sharp sticks were the ultimate in weaponry and are included in the term " arms " which covers everything from war machines to yes sharp sticks.
And all the cannons and black powder were privately owned. They were not the property of the king.
 
Top