Supreme Court: 2nd Amendment applies to Stun Guns

http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/03...-to-stun-guns/

A few gems:

Quote:

---

In both the main opinion and Alito and Thomas’ concurrence, the Court pushes back on the Massachusetts’ court’s attempt to limit the “individual rights” protected under the Second Amendment.

---

Quote:

---

Caetano’s encounter with her violent ex-boyfriend illustrates the connection between those fundamental rights: By arming herself, Caetano was able to protect against a physical threat that restraining orders had proved useless to prevent. And, commendably, she did so by using a weapon that posed little, if any, danger of permanently harming either herself or the father of her children.

---

Quote:

---

Heller was lauded by gun rights advocates for its clear enunciation of how the Second Amendment provides rights to individuals. The Caetano decision further bolsters that case precedent in a critical moment for the Court after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia and with a presidential election looming in the fall.

---

BTW, Mark Hamill is a fsck-head. He supports every American's right to a musket. How about every American's right to the current state of the art in military small arms (which is what muskets were in 1776)?

Ban those Kentucky "Sniper" Rifles!

A common sense decision.

I see Miller in the decision but not the story. I don't know why gun rights folks aren't making more use of Miller.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skip

A common sense decision.

I see Miller in the decision but not the story. I don't know why gun rights folks aren't making more use of Miller.

---

Actually, this decision is kind of a complement to Miller. What Miller said was that US citizens had a right to military-grade weapons (the point is kind of missed by most regressive Stalinist gun-control fanatics -- whoa, is that triply redundant or what?). Caetano seems to say citizens have a right to self-defense weapons that AREN'T used by the military.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter

Actually, this decision is kind of a complement to Miller. What Miller said was that US citizens had a right to military-grade weapons (the point is kind of missed by most regressive Stalinist gun-control fanatics -- whoa, is that triply redundant or what?). Caetano seems to say citizens have a right to self-defense weapons that AREN'T used by the military.

---

I thought it was military and police which = common use.

The police commonly use, and are issued, Tasers.

Either way, I see huge advantage in the concepts of common use setting an even bar so people like Hamil can go #%^! themselves. I wish we'd make more use of it.

Not to take away jobs from the known re-post police but....

https://www.ar-15.co/threads/155128-...irearm-weapons