Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: slightly OT article about tasers and a follow-up article

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321

    slightly OT article about tasers and a follow-up article

    GRAND RAPIDS Women who live alone and fathers of female college students share a particular interest when it comes to hand-held protection: the Taser.
    More than other groups, they want to legalize the electric-shock weapon for civilians as an alternative to handguns.
    State Sen. Arlan Meekhof, R-West Olive, got to know the demographics as he sponsored a 2008 bill to make Tasers legal in Michigan under the concealed weapons law.
    Three years later, the effort is back. Tasers have been a tool for Michigan police for several years but are illegal to have outside of law enforcement
    see more:
    http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapi...e_legal_t.html

    GRAND RAPIDS -- A bill is in the state Senate to allow Tasers under the state's concealed-carry permit law.
    Many readers responded to a Sunday story on the issue, commenting about fears of Tasers being misused or even fired because someone else annoyed or angered a Taser owner.
    Backers of the bill say the scenario is unlikely, mostly because Tasers would be regulated under the concealed-carry law.
    see more:
    http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapi...l_in_mich.html
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    I've heard of some dog owners who wanted them legal so they could "train" their pit-bulls.

  3. #3
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    I think tasers should be able to legally be carried openly or concealed with no permit necessary. As long as you're not going into places like courts, jails, and places that ban "weapons" you should be allowed to carry a taser. If people can in most other states in the U.S. what is the problem. Are people in those states more responsible than Michigan residents? Also if we do require a "CPL" to carry it we would need to switch to "CCW" it seems to me.
    Last edited by xmanhockey7; 03-21-2011 at 06:47 PM.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    It should be covered under A2, just the same as a firearm, or a sock full of rocks.

  5. #5
    Regular Member kryptonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    248
    the law never made sense to me forbidding taser carry. you can carry a deadly weapon designed to kill but can't carry one that just temporarily stuns someone with no lasting effects. the police style stun guns (costing more than a lot of handguns) is good for one shot but can be repeatedly triggered while the shock electrodes are still in. the CO2 blast that launches the electrodes also emits small traceable numbered dots. too many for the criminal user to possibly pick up.
    if you used it instead of firearm to stop an assailant you would either have to flee, allow the assailant to flee or detain/restrain the bad guy. do you keep pulling the trigger with one finger while calling 911 with the other hand?
    there would of course be more legal justifications for it's use than a firearm for defense. i'm all for the legalization.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    There are lasting effects.

  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,616
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    There are lasting effects.
    There are potential deadly or lasting effects - that is why such are commonly referred to as less lethal, rather than the old non-lethal.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Ive heard about psychological issues, the brain doesnt respond well to shock, and it causes both internal and external burning and scarring. Ive seen external scaring personally.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wyandotte, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Ive heard about psychological issues, the brain doesnt respond well to shock, and it causes both internal and external burning and scarring. Ive seen external scaring personally.
    Even if there are lasting effects.....at least the criminal gets a likely second chance on life. A bullet to the head or center mass offers a lot less hope of a full recovery.
    Last edited by budlight; 03-22-2011 at 12:15 AM.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Sure, thats a given, I just dont like it when these things are portrayed as harmless. Less than lethal ok, but to say that it has no lasting effects, is dishonest, or at the least, uninformed.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    RTM, Lake Linden, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    232
    Whenever I am discussing this I like to put it in perspective to my audience. The State of Michigan has licensed me to carry a 29.9 inch semi-automatic handgun with as large a clip as I like, with one in the chamber, and with the safety off on my hip. A Taser on the other hand, is to dangerous. Don't get me wrong, that's not what or how I carry, just lends a little interpretation to the minds of the legislature.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Let me see...

    A Taser gets one shot at one attacker. More than one attacker means either carry more than one Taser or... also carry a firearm to address multiple attackers.

    A Taser is less lethal but can still cause death or lasting health problems in some instances. The same can be said for a firearm.

    A Taser's effects can be greatly lessened by heavy clothing or even defeated by protective vests. The same can be said for a firearm.

    A Taser's effects can be ignored by some attackers who are either extremely determined or under the influence of drugs. The same can be said for the effects of a firearm.

    So, to my mind, the Taser has the glaring disadvantage of only a one shot capability and it's less than lethal effects for the attacker does not offer any superior benefit for the victim to defend their self. Although it could offer the criminal the benefit of suffering lesser consequences for his/her violent criminal attack.

    But aside from the obvious limitation of getting only a one shot chance at only one attacker to stop an attack by multiple attackers.... in my opinion the most dangerous thing about Tasers is, since a Taser will be hyped as the more humane method of dealing with a violent criminal (humane for the criminal you see) then there really is no need for common citizens to ............... carry a firearm. And I can imagine a host of "reasonable" (to the anti firearm people) arguments that would cast firearms as evil nasty things in comparison to the much "safer" Taser. And all those "reasonable" arguments would end up pointing out that a Taser meets the definition of an "arm" thereby satisfying the 2nd Amendment right to "bear arms"..............

    and in short order the common folks will be limited to only Tasers but the elite will still have firearms capable of multiple shots... that can control the common folk who only have one shot Tasers.

    Think of the Taser as the modern day version of peasants with torches and pitchforks storming the castle's cannons......

    So... would all that happen with Tasers replacing firearms for the common folk? Or would common sense prevail and folks would have the option of either a Taser or firearm.. or both?

    I dunno... just offering the possibility for folks to consider.

    Edited to reflect the difference between "less than lethal" and "less lethal" although I don't like either of those since it falls short of offering what the Taser is "less lethal" .... than.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 03-22-2011 at 10:36 AM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  13. #13
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,616
    Just to clarify -

    A taser is not less than lethal. This implies not lethal, w/o the potential.

    It is less lethal.

    This phraseology is as a result of searching for a simple term that adequately describes the capacity to harm/be effective and is easier to remember than "less likely to cause major injury or death in most situations while controlling the subject when deployed in accordance with training standards in effect at that time."
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  14. #14
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811
    i think tasers would be a great thing,im sure there are many people that would be comfortable carrying a taser, while being uncomfortable carrying a firearm.

    And every new person that takes means to protect themselves, i feel makes the community a little safer.
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by northofnowhere View Post
    The State of Michigan has licensed me to carry a 29.9 inch semi-automatic handgun with as large a clip as I like
    You carry a C96?

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Tasers have been a tool for Michigan police for several years but are illegal to have outside of law enforcement
    I'm not saying it should be the other way, but it would make a damn sight more sense in reverse.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    I agree, cops have shown that they cannot be trusted with a tazer.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    I agree, cops have shown that they cannot be trusted with a tazer.
    Yup. I would put the tasers in the armory with the guns. Need to respond to a situation requiring a taser? You can take 30 seconds to get a warrant by phone. NBD.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    RTM, Lake Linden, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    You carry a C96?
    No, Glock 23.

  20. #20
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Sure, thats a given, I just dont like it when these things are portrayed as harmless. Less than lethal ok, but to say that it has no lasting effects, is dishonest, or at the least, uninformed.
    Plus they DO NOT work against armed BG's.This is a dangerous fraud!
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  21. #21
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    The question becomes how much tactical gear is one willing to carry in their daily life...?

    I understand, this is a personal question and a personal choice. If carrying a taser meant carrying one of those big ones LEOs carry, I'm not sure how many would do it.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by northofnowhere View Post
    No, Glock 23.
    Oh, cool. Excellent firearm.

    But it isn't clip-fed.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    You carry a C96?
    Well, isn't the C96 still a magazine fed firearm, it's just a fixed magazine. Wouldn't clips be used to load the fixed magazine like in an M1?

    http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-co...un-500x394.jpg

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_(firearms)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clip_(ammunition)

    http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog...0609rc9-tm.jpg

    Bronson
    Last edited by Bronson; 03-22-2011 at 05:05 PM.
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Thomas Paine

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Well, isn't the C96 still a magazine fed firearm, it's just a fixed magazine. Wouldn't clips be used to load the fixed magazine like in an M1?
    Sure, every repeater has a magazine, by definition.

    But only a fraction of guns with magazines are clip-fed. The C96 is the handgun which most immediately comes to mind.

    Anyway, I was just being a smart-ass.


    Edit: If you are asking whether the C96 is able to be fed by clips; yup, it is. Take a look:

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...1916_Red_4.JPG

    That's a pretty sweet pic, btw. Very illustrative.
    Last edited by marshaul; 03-22-2011 at 06:25 PM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    You carry a C96?
    Some older Grendel's too.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •