Stun Gun Challenge (Martel v. Healey)

[Len-2A Training]

You can buy the non-taser brand stun guns (which as I recall is what Caetano had,) over the counter in most states for as little as $10 bucks. It may be true that there are only a few hundred thousand of the $850 Taser brand stun guns in civilian hands but that's just a fraction of the market.

Not that it's relevant - they're still arms.

Thank you for raising the precise issue I have with the (so-called) "facts" in Healey's diatribe. I have been in many gun shops in NH, VT and ME where stun guns are legal. I have NEVER seen a Taser for sale in other than a "cop shop" anywhere. Yet, I have seen tons of contact-type stun guns offered to sale damn near everywhere.

Healey states statistics on civilian ownership of Taser (brand) and then claims it's such a small number that the devices are not in common use. She totally disregards all those unknown numbers of other devices sold by Amazon, corner convenience stores and gun shops in those 45 states where they are legal. I'm not sure how one would quantify all those sales to come up with real numbers, but Taser isn't the only game in town.

Also IIRC from my days as a police officer, Taser would ONLY sell to LE and not to civilians. I'm not sure when they changed that policy but that (along with their ridiculous ~$800+ pricetag) can easily account for low sales numbers to individuals . . . not to mention that their product is huge and hard to conceal vs. "competition" who sells less powerful but very small devices which they claim to be effective (I doubt that, but it's not relevant to the case).

I do hope Comm2A will look into Taser sales policies to refute the AG's BS motion.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

YIt may be true that there are only a few hundred thousand of the $850 Taser brand stun guns in civilian hands but that's just a fraction of the market.

$399.99 retail https://buy.taser.com/taser-pulse/

Also IIRC from my days as a police officer, Taser would ONLY sell to LE and not to civilians. I'm not sure when they changed that policy but that (along with their ridiculous ~$800+ pricetag)

They have models specifically targeted to the little people. I don't know if they have the same potency as the police tasers. I also doubt the red livestock Taser is police only.

At one point, the civilian version of the Taser required activation after on-line authentication of ID (and payment of an additional fee) to register the serial number of the confetti to the owner.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Rob, thanks for more info. I still contend that there are probably 10-fold as many $10-50 stun guns out there in legal civilian hands than the quantity of Taser-branded product in legal civilian hands. People like "cheap" and Taser doesn't do that.

 

[amm5061]

Rob, thanks for more info. I still contend that there are probably 10-fold as many $10-50 stun guns out there in legal civilian hands than the quantity of Taser-branded product in legal civilian hands. People like "cheap" and Taser doesn't do that.

I'm currently sitting in my mother's living room in PA, and there is a (non-Taser) stun gun sitting 3 feet away from me on the fireplace mantle. They are extremely common outside MA.

 

[rep308]

Searching for Taser on Amazon results in a list of cheap stun guns for sale $10-$50

 

[Waher]

Her response makes it clear her only argument is, "because I said so!".

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Rob, thanks for more info. I still contend that there are probably 10-fold as many $10-50 stun guns out there in legal civilian hands than the quantity of Taser-branded product in legal civilian hands. People like "cheap" and Taser doesn't do that.

10-fold? I think you missed a zero or two.

Despite their prevalence, I think these contact stun guns give a false sense of security that one is armed, particularly among those with weak to non-existent CQB skills (yes, I include myself in that category, since I am neither grizzled nor a veteran of the means streets or sandbox).

 

[David Balkus]

I find it funny that on page 13, Her office infers to the use of tasers as torture, Unless used by trained law enforcement.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Rob, no dispute on effectiveness. Just raw numbers wrt "common use" vs. rare (Healey's contention).

 

[Drix]

Somehow I find it amusing that at the core of her argument it is lawful to kill someone in self defense, but it is not lawful to incapacitate them, because if it were we would have the tools to do so. I guess my take home is that Maura approves of judicious marksmanship.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Maura =

 

[pastera]

Scanned through the MTD real quick - Is she actually trying to piss off the SCOTUS? because that drivel is how you do it...

 

[jtnf]

Scanned through the MTD real quick - Is she actually trying to piss off the SCOTUS? because that drivel is how you do it...

Can't resist an Archer meme when the opportunity presents itself...

 

[Coyote33]

So, her argument is ... No Electrical Weapons because .... MUSKETS!

I also like the argument that the masses can't have non-lethal weapons because they have other options like ... LETHAL WEAPONS!

Wait, so how does this argument work when ... POLICE ... ?

... It is hard to comprehend why the AG prefers people carry handguns instead of Tasers. I can only conclude her logic is the people wanting to carry Tasers will go unarmed rather than carry guns if she wins. ...

Again, why do they prefer the POLICE to have and use them?

... The TASER brand (pneumatically fired probes on wires) is the "real thing". It is misnomeristic to use TASER as a generic term for electric stun gun.

So, there is no other maker that has one that shoots out electrical probes?

I find it funny that on page 13, Her office infers to the use of tasers as torture, Unless used by trained law enforcement.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

And today we have plaintiffs' CONSOLIDATED MEMORANDUM IN REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT AND IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

My favorite part:

And as a matter of fact, the Mass.gov webpage titled “Massachusetts Law About Guns and Other Weapons” cites to Caetano for the proposition that “a stun gun is protected by the Second Amendment.” See http://www.mass.gov/courts/caselegal-res/law-lib/laws-by-subj/about/weapons.html No court has held otherwise.

 

[Waher]

What's the estimated time frame on the court issuing a decision now? Weeks or months?

 

[Drix]

My favorite part: And as a matter of fact, the Mass.gov webpage titled “Massachusetts Law About Guns and Other Weapons” cites to Caetano for the proposition that “a stun gun is protected by the Second Amendment.” See http://www.mass.gov/courts/caselegal...t/weapons.html No court has held otherwise.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

And today we have plaintiffs' CONSOLIDATED MEMORANDUM IN REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT AND IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

My favorite part:

[h=1]Page not found about the stun gun being protected by 2A[/h]

 

[Rob Boudrie]

So, there is no other maker that has one that shoots out electrical probes?

I don't think so. Additional info welcome.

 

[Drix]

Page not found about the stun gun being protected by 2A

It was up when I replied, saw it with my own eyes.

To navigate to:

Case and legal resources tab
Law librarys will give you a drop down to laws by subject
Chose link "Massachusetts laws about"
Choose subject "guns"
Search for "stun gun"

I don't think so. Additional info welcome.

Phazzer makes a tazer knockoff, but I'm not aware of many probe shooting options out there.

 

[pastera]

I don't think so. Additional info welcome.

A search using the terms "projectile stun gun" will lead to several sites with brands other than Taser products.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B017...e+stun+gun&dpPl=1&dpID=31L2qYnBePL&ref=plSrch
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00N...1F6NT2DENCT4WN0&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65



Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

What's the estimated time frame on the court issuing a decision now? Weeks or months?

I think the AG will have one more opportunity for a filing - probably a reply to our opposition to her MJS. There shouldn't be any need for discovery, so probably the court will set a date for a hearing in the next couple of weeks. Once we have a hearing it could be 3-6 months for a ruling. But, this is all speculative. I think the case will go pretty fast from here.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Yesterday the AG filed her reply to our MSJ.

 

[RImike]

JFC, the BECAUSE I SAID SO!!!!!!argument is getting old. Do the courts really tolerate that shit?

 

[amm5061]

JFC, the BECAUSE I SAID SO!!!!!!argument is getting old. Do the courts really tolerate that shit?

Yes, 'cos, "OMG GUNZ R BAD M'KAY!" and, "we do not believe in self help."

 

[EMTDAD]

the "popularity" argument is a circular argument... stun guns aren't popular (at least in MA) because they're banned... so AG office is saying they should continue to be banned because they aren't popular. WTF?

 

[RImike]

the "popularity" argument is a circular argument... stun guns aren't popular (at least in MA) because they're banned... so AG office is saying they should continue to be banned because they aren't popular. WTF?

If this argument was put into Excel it would loose it's mind

 

[Garys]

Wouldn't it just be more direct to say, "We ignore the decisions and orders of the Supreme Court of the United States when we don't like those decisions and orders. There for Nenanenanena, you can't make us follow the law and Constitution." ?

Yesterday the AG filed her reply to our MSJ.

 

[Obie1]

Was this actually written by a lawyer? The reasoning would flunk an eighth grade debate.

 

[Al458]

"Since District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), courts have concluded that, to
qualify for Second Amendment protection, a weapon must be (1) in common use at the time, and
(2) typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.)."

She is saying stun guns are neither(which is b.s), but wouldn't her argument in defense of a stun gun ban be a direct contradiction to her defense of the "assault weapon" ban?