Gun Owners Nationwide Cheer as U.S. Supreme Court Smacks Down Massachusetts Over its Stun Gun Ban — Says the ban contradicts Heller
Springfield, VA -(AmmoLand.com)- Antonin Scalia would have been pleased.
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed an anti-gun decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, and upheld the 2008 Heller decision in the process.
The Massachusetts case involved a 4’11” woman who was being threatened by an ex-boyfriend, who was nearly a foot taller. She pulled a stun gun and chased him away.
While that was good news for her, this is where things got dicey. Her possession of the stun gun violated the Bay State’s ban on “electrical weapons.”
She was tried and convicted, with the state supreme court ultimately holding that her possession of a stun gun was not protected by the Second Amendment since it represented technology that could not have been foreseen in 1791.
But what about speech that is transmitted via computers, radio and TV? Is that not protected by the First Amendment since this technology did not exist in the eighteenth century?
This was the exact point made by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas in their concurring opinion:
Electronic stun guns are no more exempt from the Second Amendment’s protections, simply because they were unknown to the First Congress, than electronic communications are exempt from the First Amendment, or electronic imaging devices are exempt from the Fourth Amendment.
As for the brief opinion in Caetano v. Massachusetts, the Supreme Court rejected claims by Massachusetts that stun guns are not protected by the Second Amendment because they are “dangerous and unusual” or because they must be supposedly suitable for warfare.
In each instance, the Court said the Massachusetts opinion was inconsistent with Heller.
You can read GOA’s amicus brief in the original Heller case here — and contribute here to help with GOA’s current caseload, like fighting the 1986 ban on machine guns.
About Gun Owners of America (GOA):
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul.
For more information, visit: www.gunowners.org.
You know what sucks I had a gun permit n a carrying permit for new Jersey n I was arrested for possession of a gun didn’t do no jail just one year probation because I had my gun with me while I was doing my second job as a bounty hunter. I felt that my 2nd Amendment was violated
Good job SCOTUS! As I’ve always said: ‘ARMS’ are ‘ARMS’ and 2A protects our right to ‘keep and bear’ them all! Nowhere in 2A does it state that any types that are prohibited. In fact, the U.S. Constitution was ordained (conceived) and established (put on paper) to limit the power of the Federal and States’ Governments only, not “the people”. Therefore, ALL of the rights guaranteed to “the people” in the Bill of Rights are absolute. Any court ruling to the contrary is treason because “the people” of this republic are the government… ‘Of the People, Buy the People and… Read more »
B.Zerker this site needs an amen section or at least and ^ vote section.
Thanks Carl!
Eventually, leftist officials in the SCOTUS, Congress or a regulatory agency will be successful in defining the term “arms” as used in the 27 words they find so difficult to understand. Australia serves as a fair example of how misunderstood this natural, civil right is. I just learned that “puff cannons” used to project souvenir T-shirts into crowds at sporting events have been defined as illegal “arms” and must be turned in to the government. The leftist flimflam has no boundary.