• 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.

Can AZCDL work on getting nunchucks legal?

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
I don't carry or own nunchaku but every time I see that law I cringe.

Great knife laws, great gun laws, but nunchucks ...... Oh no!

It's embarrasing.

If they were legal and I wanted some I would open carry them ..... promise ;)

I forgot about that law but I was trying to see if something like tannerite would be considered a prohibited weapon or firework here. I'm still not sure either way on that one. :confused:
 
Last edited:

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
I don't carry or own nunchaku but every time I see that law I cringe. Great knife laws, great gun laws, but nunchucks ...... Oh no! It's embarrasing. If they were legal and I wanted some I would open carry them ..... promise. I forgot about that law but I was trying to see if something like tannerite would be considered a prohibited weapon or firework here. I'm still not sure either way on that one.
Sharkey - I apologize. I am not famliar with the statute banning nunchucks. Can you direct me to it?

Thanks!
Fred

 

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
13-3101 8 v

8. "Prohibited weapon":

(a) Includes the following:

(i) An item that is a bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces or mine and that is explosive, incendiary or poison gas.

(ii) A device that is designed, made or adapted to muffle the report of a firearm.

(iii) A firearm that is capable of shooting more than one shot automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

(iv) A rifle with a barrel length of less than sixteen inches, or shotgun with a barrel length of less than eighteen inches, or any firearm that is made from a rifle or shotgun and that, as modified, has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.

(v) An instrument, including a nunchaku, that consists of two or more sticks, clubs, bars or rods to be used as handles, connected by a rope, cord, wire or chain, in the design of a weapon used in connection with the practice of a system of self-defense.
 

hdwizard

New member
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
5
Location
Phoenix
I don't carry or own nunchaku but every time I see that law I cringe.

Great knife laws, great gun laws, but nunchucks ...... Oh no!

It's embarrasing.

If they were legal and I wanted some I would open carry them ..... promise ;)

I forgot about that law but I was trying to see if something like tannerite would be considered a prohibited weapon or firework here. I'm still not sure either way on that one. :confused:

Re. nunchucks, I'm certainly not averse to giving it the ol' college try, but with our current Governor, I wouldn't put very good odds on a signature. Law enforcement will hate the very thought of it, and that's pretty much the kiss of death where Jan is concerned.

Re. tannerite, most LE agencies in AZ consider it a firework, one that is not allowed under current law, and will confiscate it if they catch you using it. Many will cite you for a violation of local fireworks ordinances as well.

Caveat emptor, as always. I'm not a lawyer, but I do play a lobbyist at the capitol ... ;)
 

randian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
380
Location
Phoenix, AZ
13-3101 8 v

8. "Prohibited weapon":

(a) Includes the following:
...
(iii) A firearm that is capable of shooting more than one shot automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.
...
That's interesting. I thought full-auto weapons were legal in Arizona.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
(v) An instrument, including a nunchaku, that consists of two or more sticks, clubs, bars or rods to be used as handles, connected by a rope, cord, wire or chain, in the design of a weapon used in connection with the practice of a system of self-defense.

I am guessing the only reason there has not been a challenge is due to lack of popularity of nunchaku. Honestly outlawing a system of self-defense is clearly unconstitutional. It is like they wrote just so it would get challenged.
 

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
I am guessing the only reason there has not been a challenge is due to lack of popularity of nunchaku. Honestly outlawing a system of self-defense is clearly unconstitutional. It is like they wrote just so it would get challenged.
Usually it's a way to make an easy arrest on certain segments of the population (i.e., minorities).

When we (AzCDL) pushed for Constitutional Carry, an objection from members of law enforcement was that, by making the permit optional, it would take away an easy arrest tool.

Fred
 

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
That's interesting. I thought full-auto weapons were legal in Arizona.
They are as long as you jump through the federal hoops. I'm not familiar with the statues, but in Arizona you can own Class III (or is it II) weapons if you can legally do so under federal law.

Fred
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Usually it's a way to make an easy arrest on certain segments of the population (i.e., minorities).

When we (AzCDL) pushed for Constitutional Carry, an objection from members of law enforcement was that, by making the permit optional, it would take away an easy arrest tool.

Fred

I get that, but they put it into the law that it was a system of self defense, something SCOTUS has ruled is a right. The wording is just begging for a challenge.
 

azcdlfred

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
901
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
I get that, but they put it into the law that it was a system of self defense, something SCOTUS has ruled is a right. The wording is just begging for a challenge.
Challenges take tons of money to bet on what amounts to a coin flip. And, you need to find someone willing to get arrested and possibly jailed to start the court challenge.

The more direct and less costly path is via the legislature to change the law.

Fred
 

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
That's interesting. I thought full-auto weapons were legal in Arizona.

Keep scrolling. Same statute, go all the way down to B

B. The items set forth in subsection A, paragraph 8, subdivision (a), items (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of this section do not include any firearms or devices that are registered in the national firearms registry and transfer records of the United States treasury department or any firearm that has been classified as a curio or relic by the United States treasury department.
 

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
I get that, but they put it into the law that it was a system of self defense, something SCOTUS has ruled is a right. The wording is just begging for a challenge.

Here's a current challenge in NY. I'm skimming it now. ETA ... ughh, the potential saviour of Nun chucks is gun bashing in the pdf. :mad:

https://files.nyu.edu/jmm257/public/rice/116-0-second-amended-complaint-w-corr-at-para-59.pdf

https://files.nyu.edu/jmm257/public/rice/

and more ETA .. Arizona case law ...State v. Swanton, 629 P.2d 98, 99 (Ariz. Ct. App.
1981). I can't find a good link though.
 
Last edited:

rscottie

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
608
Location
Ashland, Kentucky, USA
I don't think any self-defense tool should be illegal.

I tried to "work" numchucks a couple of times.

I should have stopped after whacking myself the first time. The second time almost knocked me out.

So, if someone has the skills, they can have them!

I'll keep my .45!
 

Freiheit417

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
167
Location
Connecticut
ND-bo-staff.jpg

Skills are good.

"You know, like nunchuku skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills... Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills." - Napoleon Dynamite

Sorry, couldn't resist a little humor...
 
Top