• 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.
  • 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.

Go lethal or go home?

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,450
Location
Valhalla
#1
Woman buys/carries a stun gun as protection against her abusive ex-boyfriend.

In defiance of the Mass law outlawing stun guns.

Gets arrested and found guilty. Appeals based on claim that stun guns come under the protection of the Second Amendment.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/sjc/reporter-of-decisions/new-opinions/11718.pdf ( Commonwealth v Jamie Caetano )

This is going to be interesting as it passes through the Mass courts. If she loses at the State level the journey through the Federal courts ought to be even more interesting.

As someone who escaped Mass before I was old enough to posses a firearm* I'm interested in how the local folks see the situation.

stay safe.

* - Out of curiosity, not that there is even the remotest chance that when I returned to take the free ride at state schools then being offered to returning Vietnam Vets, a) is there a statute of limitations on firearms possession violations, and b) if there is, how long is it?
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,200
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
#2
That very well may have been the most poorly argued decision I've ever read.

Either the court wants to for the state to lose the appeal, or they're blithering idiots.

The conduct at issue in this case falls outside the "core"
of the Second Amendment, insofar as the defendant was not using
the stun gun to defend herself in her home... and involves
a "dangerous and unusual weapon" that was not "in common use at
the time" of enactment
The latter part is exactly the argument against semi-automatic handguns which Heller rejected, and the former part has been addressed by McDonald. This argument seriously seems tailor-made to be bad.
 

Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,450
Location
Valhalla
#5
Top