• 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.

Court: Stun gun possession is a right protected by Michigan, U.S. constitutions

stainless1911

Banned
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
8,855
Location
Davisburg, Michigan, United States
Quote : 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving handguns which “guarantee(s) the individual the right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation”

So, we can carry tazers and other weapons without fear of prosecution, or a CPL?

What about 227, and 231a? Wouldn't the same logic apply to handguns?
 
Last edited:

Fishous

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
39
Location
Ludington, Michigan, USA
From the Courts decision, considering this:

"Because tasers and stun guns do not fit any of the exceptions to the Second Amendment enumerated in Heller, we find that they are protected arms."

and this

"We therefore conclude that a total prohibition on the open carrying of a protected arm such as a taser or stun gun is unconstitutional."

Would this not make the prohibition of open carry unconstitutional? Am I understanding that correctly?

Does anyone have a list of the exceptions enumerated in Heller?
 

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
From the Courts decision, considering this:

"Because tasers and stun guns do not fit any of the exceptions to the Second Amendment enumerated in Heller, we find that they are protected arms."

and this

"We therefore conclude that a TOTAL prohibition on the open carrying of a protected arm such as a taser or stun gun is unconstitutional."

Would this not make the prohibition of open carry unconstitutional? Am I understanding that correctly?

Does anyone have a list of the exceptions enumerated in Heller?

The new law makes it so there is no longer a TOTAL prohibition on tasers. Nothing in this decision says no restrictions are allowed, just no TOTAL prohibitions.
 
Last edited:

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
The new law makes it so there is no longer a TOTAL prohibition on tasers. Nothing in this decision says no restrictions are allowed, just no TOTAL prohibitions.

^^^^THIS^^^^

It's very sad, but the judges don't understand "shall not be infringed".
 
Top