MA SJC rules stun gun ban violates the 2A

[firestorm]

March 17 was when Webster decided to add that little part.

Yeah, due to anti gun agenda. I feel I covered that pretty clearly.

 

[Pete85]

Do any of our more legal minded people have any insight on this at this point? The court ruling came on April 17, with a 60 day period for the legislature to respond. Nothing has been passed at this point, so does that mean that as of June 16, there are no laws regarding electrical control weapons in Massachusetts?

 

[Coyote33]

Do any of our more legal minded people have any insight on this at this point? The court ruling came on April 17, with a 60 day period for the legislature to respond. Nothing has been passed at this point, so does that mean that as of June 16, there are no laws regarding electrical control weapons in Massachusetts?

If it was 60 days, then I guess that is a yes.

 

[VetteGirlMA]

June 16th would be 60 days later., so I'm guessing they're legal now?

 

[amm5061]

June 16th would be 60 days later., so I'm guessing they're legal now?

Until Baker signs the ERPO bill and makes them essentially illegal again because no stun gun in existence can possibly comply with the bullshit regulations.

 

[Pete85]

What part of the ERPO bill would make them essentially illegal again?

 

[Coyote33]

In any event, it seems that they are now legal. I wonder if people are already buying these.

 

[amm5061]

What part of the ERPO bill would make them essentially illegal again?

The parts that require all sorts of impossible features for the stun gun/taser to be sold in MA.

 

[invaliduser]

Well while it's still legal.. lets buy some tasers guys!

 

[Waher]

Until Baker signs the ERPO bill and makes them essentially illegal again because no stun gun in existence can possibly comply with the bullshit regulations.

And if some manufacture did make one which did, Healey would pull a "Glock loaded chamber indicator" on the company with a consumer 'protection' suit.

 

[ggboy]

So what is the current status of buying a taser jn Ma?
ggboy

 

[Waher]

According to the ruling it is legal and constitutional carry. According to how the MSP, local PD, DA's, and the AG will make shit up to bankrupt you, declare you 'unsuitable', and keep you behind bars, no one knows.

 

[42!]

According to the ruling it is legal and constitutional carry. According to how the MSP, local PD, DA's, and the AG will make shit up to bankrupt you, declare you 'unsuitable', and keep you behind bars, we all know.

FIFY

 

[Al-Jim19]

According to the ruling it is legal and constitutional carry. According to how the MSP, local PD, DA's, and the AG will make shit up to bankrupt you, declare you 'unsuitable', and keep you behind bars, no one knows.

If we always subscribe to this line of thought we might as well not even own guns. Get what y’all want. It’s legal.

For now.

 

[Tater]

In any event, it seems that they are now legal. I wonder if people are already buying these.

Yup.... On order

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

Who are the quality manufacturers? I know of Taser/Axon but beyond that I am clueless.

 

[ggboy]

Axon is the new NYSe stock name for Taser.
ggboy

 

[Al-Jim19]

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B07CZPSNXT/ref=ox_sc_act_image_1_1_1?smid=A1A2XYD02Y8FHP&psc=1

I’ve had my eye on this gem for a little while. Price is good and you get a good quality holster with it.

 

[amm5061]

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B07CZPSNXT/ref=ox_sc_act_image_1_1_1?smid=A1A2XYD02Y8FHP&psc=1

I’ve had my eye on this gem for a little while. Price is good and you get a good quality holster with it.

I've heard some interesting things about the Pulse. Wish they weren't so expensive, though.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I've heard some interesting things about the Pulse. Wish they weren't so expensive, though.

It does look interesting. BUT it looks like a gun and if you also carry a gun and mistakenly draw the gun instead of the Taser you will go to jail. One or two cops have shot people when they grabbed the wrong instrument but of course nothing happens to them . . . we wouldn't be so lucky.

 

[Al-Jim19]

I've heard some interesting things about the Pulse. Wish they weren't so expensive, though.

I consider it relatively cheap - the x26 is like $1000 on amazon right? $275 isn’t too bad by comparison. I don’t think any other brand of stun gun gives you range like a taser too.

It does look interesting. BUT it looks like a gun and if you also carry a gun and mistakenly draw the gun instead of the Taser you will go to jail. One or two cops have shot people when they grabbed the wrong instrument but of course nothing happens to them . . . we wouldn't be so lucky.

I would have a taser to carry in place of a gun, and I like that it will intuitively point in a way I’m already familiar with. I can think of a few situations where I could carry the 8oz taser but not a pistol for various reasons.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It does look interesting. BUT it looks like a gun and if you also carry a gun and mistakenly draw the gun instead of the Taser you will go to jail. One or two cops have shot people when they grabbed the wrong instrument but of course nothing happens to them . . . we wouldn't be so lucky.

There was a cop in one of the major cities (forget which one, maybe SF) who got a year prison for this mistake.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I can't think of anyplace that I might go where the Taser would be OK, but a gun would not be OK. As much as I'd like to have the option, I don't see it in the cards for me right now.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I consider it relatively cheap - the x26 is like $1000 on amazon right? $275 isn’t too bad by comparison. I don’t think any other brand of stun gun gives you range like a taser too.

The X26 offers two shots, the $275 Taser offers one. The X26 also has a lot of data management features (you can download massive stats about every deployment, charge test, etc.) that is probably no in the cheaper version. The cheaper version may lack the drive stun feature as well. And finally, check the shock pattern/duration to see if it is a different civilian one.

 

[Matt_SERE]

I can't think of anyplace that I might go where the Taser would be OK, but a gun would not be OK. As much as I'd like to have the option, I don't see it in the cards for me right now.

In the PRM, or like states, could it be a little different? In MA if a youth picks up a parents fire arm and uses it for self defense the parent would go to jail. Have the 'rulers' in MA decided what they would do if a youth, of non-LTC FID persuasion, would do if the same scenario happened?

Sorry, I got lost in this thread.

 

[amm5061]

In the PRM, or like states, could it be a little different? In MA if a youth picks up a parents fire arm and uses it for self defense the parent would go to jail. Have the 'rulers' in MA decided what they would do if a youth, of non-LTC FID persuasion, would do if the same scenario happened?

Sorry, I got lost in this thread.

LOL they're still trying to outlaw them with bullshit legislation requiring features that don't exist and probably couldn't be implemented even if they did. Think along the lines of how Kommiefornia defacto outlawed any new pistols from being sold in the state with the microstamping law.

 

[firestorm]

LOL they're still trying to outlaw them with bullshit legislation requiring features that don't exist and probably couldn't be implemented even if they did. Think along the lines of how Kommiefornia defacto outlawed any new pistols from being sold in the state with the microstamping law.

People keep saying this, but what is the actual wording in the new law? What are they trying to require?

 

[inkdesigner]

People keep saying this, but what is the actual wording in the new law? What are they trying to require?

Based on what I can recall, in the new EPRO bill passed by the Senate, they mention amending Chapter 140, Section 121, line 44, and substituting the words "a stun gun or a pistol" in place of the words "a pistol" under the definition of Firearm.

I believe what that will do is classify a stun gun as a firearm, making, them subject to the EOPSS. This would mean they would need to be submitted to the Commonwealth for approval and inclusion on the list and they could only be sold thru an FFL to folks who have a FID/LTC and pass a NICS check. I'm sure the AG will also take the opportunity to regulate them thru her "super secret" consumer protection laws/list and make them impossible to purchase thru a FFL, much like she did with Gen 3 and up Glocks.

In other words, they will be legal, but the Commonwealth will make it such that there is no way for a person to purchase them in state.

 

[firestorm]

Based on what I can recall, in the new EPRO bill passed by the Senate, they mention amending Chapter 140, Section 121, line 44, and substituting the words "a stun gun or a pistol" in place of the words "a pistol" under the definition of Firearm.

I believe what that will do is classify a stun gun as a firearm, making, them subject to the EOPSS. This would mean they would need to be submitted to the Commonwealth for approval and inclusion on the list and they could only be sold thru an FFL to folks who have a FID/LTC and pass a NICS check. I'm sure the AG will also take the opportunity to regulate them thru her "super secret" consumer protection laws/list and make them impossible to purchase thru a FFL, much like she did with Gen 3 and up Glocks.

In other words, they will be legal, but the Commonwealth will make it such that there is no way for a person to purchase them in state.

Yeah, that is a screw job, back to the courts probably.

 

[Pete85]

As written, it looks like that would only affect stun guns and not tasers. Although from the definition it gives to the term "Stun Gun", that could likely be interpreted that all tasers are also stun guns.