Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

    Supreme Court rules against Massachusetts State Law banning stun guns. I think they are also illegal in IL, so that should go by the way side I presume. Will have to check that out.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ction-massach/
    TO BE UNARMED IS TO BE A VICTIM

    #2
    Re: SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

    Paracav, if you recall the Shephard case was combined with Moore here in IL.
    Shephard was contesting the ban on conceal carry, while Moore questioned carrying a stun gun or tazer.
    Both were remanded to lower courts under the Shephard ruling.
    The Moore decision was never truly answered.

    Comment


      #3
      Re: SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

      What I like about the ruling is that they basically killed one of the liberals favorite arguments that all newer weapons weren't covered. Since muskets were all we had at that time, those were the ONLY things protected you would hear.
      In the ruling that argument was squashed.
      "“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’ … and that this ‘Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” the court wrote, citing previous rulings from 2008 and 2010, respectively."
      Certified Armed Infidel!
      NRA Life Benefactor Member
      Help Protect Your Rights, Join the NRA today!
      Thunder 380 DuoTone & Matte

      Comment


        #4
        Re: SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

        Originally posted by cgchad View Post
        Paracav, if you recall the Shephard case was combined with Moore here in IL.
        Shephard was contesting the ban on conceal carry, while Moore questioned carrying a stun gun or tazer.
        Both were remanded to lower courts under the Shephard ruling.
        The Moore decision was never truly answered.
        I checked IL laws and a stun gun is legal but requires an FOID. From what I "understand", a stun gun can be concealed carry without a ccw, but only for self protection (why else would someone want to carry one?) And there are some stun gun free areas similar to ccw laws.
        TO BE UNARMED IS TO BE A VICTIM

        Comment


          #5
          Re: SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

          Originally posted by ParaCav View Post
          I checked IL laws and a stun gun is legal but requires an FOID. From what I "understand", a stun gun can be concealed carry without a ccw, but only for self protection (why else would someone want to carry one?) And there are some stun gun free areas similar to ccw laws.
          Correct about needing a FOID, incorrect about carry for the same reason you are correct about the FOID.

          Ref. 720 ILCS 5/24-1 & 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6 UUW & AUUW statutes.

          In a nutshell, the idiots that wrote the law group a stun gun into the same category as a firearm. Which is why you need a FOID in the first place. (Incidentally, if you want a good laugh read the pepper spray laws.)

          Moore sought to have stun guns removed from the UUW & AUUW statute on the basis that it isn't a firearm.. Our wonderful courts disagreed.
          It got rolled up with Shepard since she was also challenging the same statute, but on the constitutional grounds.
          Shepard won, but nothing addressed Moore directly that I could find.

          Comment


            #6
            Re: SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

            In a nutshell, the idiots that wrote the law, put a stun gun into the same category as a firearm.

            Roger that ........ Thank you.
            TO BE UNARMED IS TO BE A VICTIM

            Comment


              #7
              Re: SC rules stun guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment

              Originally posted by BennieH View Post
              What I like about the ruling is that they basically killed one of the liberals favorite arguments that all newer weapons weren't covered. Since muskets were all we had at that time, those were the ONLY things protected you would hear.
              In the ruling that argument was squashed.
              "“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’ … and that this ‘Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” the court wrote, citing previous rulings from 2008 and 2010, respectively."

              It potentially invalidates ALL gun-ban laws. If that is the exact wording in the ruling, it means that the "assault"-style weapons may indeed be protected as they are "bearable" arms. Unless they somewhere later in the ruling negate the "prima facie" (at first glance and without investigation) wording. Sometimes you need to read the entire ruling before coming to a final conclusion.

              Comment

              Working...
              X