slap shot
NES Member
Just curious: does this challenge also include the ability to possess and carry tasers?
The intro leads me to believe they would be treated as one and the same.
INTRODUCTIONA Taser is a conducted electrical weapon that shoots two wired probes into the skin of thetarget using a compressed nitrogen gas propellant. The probes then emit an electrical pulselasting a few seconds that causes involuntary muscle contractions and temporarily impairedmotor skills or involuntary immobilization. See http://www.taser.com/self-defense;http://www.taser.com/research-and-safety/how-a-taser-works. A stun gun emits a similarelectrical charge, but requires closer contact as the device must make contact with the target’sskin. Mass. Gen. Law. ch. 140 § 131J establishes an absolute ban on the possession, sale, or useof all electrical weapons, even in the home, including Tasers or stun guns, with exceptions onlyfor certain law enforcement officers acting in the course of their official duties and dealersselling to law enforcement. Section 131J states, “No person shall possess a portable device orweapon from which an electrical current, impulse, wave or beam may be directed, which current,impulse, wave or beam is designed to incapacitate temporarily, injure or kill.” Section 131J alsoprohibits the sale of electrical weapons to anyone other than law enforcement agencies. Thepenalty for violation of section 131J is a fine ranging from $500 to $1000, imprisonment fromsix months to two and one half years, or both.Plaintiffs are all residents of Massachusetts. See Exhibits 1-3. Plaintiffs Martel andBates are licensed to carry concealed firearms in the state of Massachusetts and have extensivetraining in firearms and self-defense. See Exhibits 1-2. Plaintiff Major has moral objections tousing firearms even in self-defense. See Exhibit 3. Based upon Plaintiffs’ training andexperience, Plaintiffs each believe there are certain situations in which they would prefer to carry a Taser or stun gun in lieu of a more deadly firearm for self-defense purposes. Plaintiffs wish to purchase and possess Tasers or stun guns for lawful self-defense purposes and would do so butfor their fear of prosecution, fines, and imprisonment under Section 131J. Defendant’senforcement of Section 131J therefore violates Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights (asincorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment) and irreparably injures Plaintiffs on an ongoingbasis. Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit to challenge this unconstitutional practice and now seekpreliminary injunctive relief to abate these ongoing injuries.