-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Stun guns in MA
- Thread starter Cap
- Start date
I believe that sling shots fall into the same category as batons, switchblades, and other "dangerous weapons" in that it's illegal to carry them on your person while committing a crime or a breach of the peace, but no laws against mere possession.
Wait, so if I make a wooden Y and slap some rubber on it like I did when I was a kid - that's illegal? What's the cite on that? Man. I really gotta stop thinking that I've made it to the end of MA's stupid laws concerning weapons.
That's always been my thing, especially with retractable batons and stun guns. You would think this state would prefer non-lethal options, especially for those of us licensed for lethal options...
The last thing a statist state wants is for self defense to become a mainstream or reasonable seeming thing. I have no idea how there wasn't massive public outcry against the arrest of a woman for self defense with a stun gun. That should have been an untenable charge for a prosecutor to bring. In any event, I feel like when someone uses a gun to defend themselves, it is easier to demonize them, and that's what big gov wants.
namedpipes
NES Member
[video=youtube_share;xBdpINm9UBU]http://youtu.be/xBdpINm9UBU?t=21s[/video]
+1 for two reasons - first, I should have posted that video.
Second, it led me to this one, which I have not seen before:
Last edited by a moderator:
We've updated the Comm2A website with the "Cliff Notes" version of the case for anyone that didn't want to wade through the entire brief.
Thanks to OfficerObie59 for his succinct recap of the issues:
After being beaten so severely she required hospital treatment, Defendant Jaime Caetano left an abusive relationship with the father of her two children. Caetano, who stands at all of 4’ 11” tall and, despite the presence of numerous restraining orders, continued to be harassed by her ex-boyfriend who would continually show up at her workplace. Homeless and in fear for her life, Caetano accepted a “stun gun” from a friend as means to defend herself.
In the fall of 2011, Caetano was arrested and charged for possession of a “stun gun”, in violation of Massachusetts General Law ch. 140, §131J, which imposes a near-total ban on all electric-based weapons in the Commonwealth. Despite presenting the aforementioned facts, Caetano was convicted of the §131J violation after a bench trial. Caetano appealed, and the Supreme Judicial Court agreed to hear her case.
This appeal of Caetano’s conviction focuses on two major questions:
Does §131J’s ban on electric weapons violate Caetano’s Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms; and
How does the Second Amendment, not yet having been held to apply outside the home in Massachusetts, apply where a person is homeless?
While the case itself concerns “stun guns”, how the Supreme Judicial Court answers these questions carries massive implications as how the Second Amendment is interpreted in the Commonwealth. As a result, Comm2A has filed an amicus brief submitted by Attorney Keith Langer on behalf of Plaintiff Caetano.
The first question asks the Supreme Judicial Court to define the scope of “arms” protected by the Second Amendment. While generally thought of as a right to keep and bear firearms, the Second Amendment’s scope is actually far broader, encompassing arms of all types. Electric weapons are made with the goal of the user’s self-defense, a fundamental right as held in the seminal Second Amendment cases District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.
The second question asks the court to define the physical scope of the Second Amendment. While numerous state and lower federal courts have found a Second Amendment right to possess arms outside the home, there has yet to be a decision in Massachusetts holding the same. This has the effect of depriving those like Caetano, who are homeless and may have a reason to fear for their safety, a means to engage in the fundamental right of self-defense, unable to keep their arms in a location where the Second Amendment has been held to apply.
Thanks to OfficerObie59 for his succinct recap of the issues:
After being beaten so severely she required hospital treatment, Defendant Jaime Caetano left an abusive relationship with the father of her two children. Caetano, who stands at all of 4’ 11” tall and, despite the presence of numerous restraining orders, continued to be harassed by her ex-boyfriend who would continually show up at her workplace. Homeless and in fear for her life, Caetano accepted a “stun gun” from a friend as means to defend herself.
In the fall of 2011, Caetano was arrested and charged for possession of a “stun gun”, in violation of Massachusetts General Law ch. 140, §131J, which imposes a near-total ban on all electric-based weapons in the Commonwealth. Despite presenting the aforementioned facts, Caetano was convicted of the §131J violation after a bench trial. Caetano appealed, and the Supreme Judicial Court agreed to hear her case.
This appeal of Caetano’s conviction focuses on two major questions:
Does §131J’s ban on electric weapons violate Caetano’s Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms; and
How does the Second Amendment, not yet having been held to apply outside the home in Massachusetts, apply where a person is homeless?
While the case itself concerns “stun guns”, how the Supreme Judicial Court answers these questions carries massive implications as how the Second Amendment is interpreted in the Commonwealth. As a result, Comm2A has filed an amicus brief submitted by Attorney Keith Langer on behalf of Plaintiff Caetano.
The first question asks the Supreme Judicial Court to define the scope of “arms” protected by the Second Amendment. While generally thought of as a right to keep and bear firearms, the Second Amendment’s scope is actually far broader, encompassing arms of all types. Electric weapons are made with the goal of the user’s self-defense, a fundamental right as held in the seminal Second Amendment cases District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.
The second question asks the court to define the physical scope of the Second Amendment. While numerous state and lower federal courts have found a Second Amendment right to possess arms outside the home, there has yet to be a decision in Massachusetts holding the same. This has the effect of depriving those like Caetano, who are homeless and may have a reason to fear for their safety, a means to engage in the fundamental right of self-defense, unable to keep their arms in a location where the Second Amendment has been held to apply.
Last edited:
The hood likes lead over rocks.
Back on topic......
The officers who searched her in the parking lot were apparently responding to reports of a shoplifter at the Shaw's market in Ashland. That was given as an excuse for the search. Nothing more was said about the supposed incident, so it could very well have been little more than a pretext for the search. The filing also indicates that Caetano readily agreed to the search presumably feeling that she had done nothing nothing wrong and therefore had nothing to hide.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,820
Tuesday, not Monday.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,820
There is no reading into this court. This is not a court that will make decisions based on what we see as a right. They are strategically approaching this issue.
The media has gotten wind of this case can given it some attention including calls to Comm2A from the AP and Boston Globe.
Boston Globe (this morning)
Homeless woman's stun gun spurs 2nd Amendment case (AP)
Court to Decide if Second Amendment Covers Stun Guns
Boston Globe (this morning)
Homeless woman's stun gun spurs 2nd Amendment case (AP)
Court to Decide if Second Amendment Covers Stun Guns
It made the AP then ABC:
Homeless Woman's Stun Gun Spurs 2nd Amendment Case
BOSTON — Nov 28, 2014, 7:22 PM ET
By DENISE LAVOIE AP Legal Affairs Writer
Jaime Caetano was beaten so badly by her ex-boyfriend that she ended up in the hospital. So when a friend offered her a stun gun to protect herself, she took it.
Caetano, who is homeless, never had to use it but now finds herself at the center of a contentious Second Amendment case headed to the highest court in Massachusetts.
The Supreme Judicial Court is being asked to decide whether a state law that prohibits private citizens from possessing stun guns infringes on their right to keep and bear arms. In an unusual twist, the court is also being asked to examine whether the Second Amendment right to defend yourself in your own home applies in the case of a homeless person. ...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/homeless-womans-stun-gun-spurs-2nd-amendment-case-27237621
Homeless Woman's Stun Gun Spurs 2nd Amendment Case
BOSTON — Nov 28, 2014, 7:22 PM ET
By DENISE LAVOIE AP Legal Affairs Writer
Jaime Caetano was beaten so badly by her ex-boyfriend that she ended up in the hospital. So when a friend offered her a stun gun to protect herself, she took it.
Caetano, who is homeless, never had to use it but now finds herself at the center of a contentious Second Amendment case headed to the highest court in Massachusetts.
The Supreme Judicial Court is being asked to decide whether a state law that prohibits private citizens from possessing stun guns infringes on their right to keep and bear arms. In an unusual twist, the court is also being asked to examine whether the Second Amendment right to defend yourself in your own home applies in the case of a homeless person. ...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/homeless-womans-stun-gun-spurs-2nd-amendment-case-27237621
namedpipes
NES Member
Many people would be willing to defend themselves with a stun gun, even those against guns.
Many that would use a stun gun would NEVER use a real gun to defend themselves.
So by making a ltl option unavailable, they raise the stakes to a level that most opt out and go defenseless.
Whether it is about control or reinforcing "guns are bad" public opinion doesn't really matter. The end is the same.
Massachusetts.
The Caetano case will be previewed on the Dan Rea show tonight on WBZ. Probably in the 10 o'clock hour.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
- Messages
- 16,367
- Likes
- 4,835
Did the defendant in this case actually display her stun gun in an attempt to defend herself? I thought I read that it was found in her purse after she submitted to a search of her person after she was accused of shoplifting. Am I confused?
EDIT: Holy pre-crime hypothetical at 14:00!
Both,. At one point, prior to her arrest, she was confronted by her ex who backed off and left after she displayed the stun gun. This incident was not connected to her arrest which was a result of a consented to police search of her handbag.
I noticed that too (I was in the courtroom). Chief Justice Gants is very Massachusetts-parochial in his
Last edited:
It will be interesting to find out if the justices let this woman suffer the consequences of her allowing the police to search her bag. I'm jaded by life experience so I won't try to guess what the judicial decision will be.
Best regards.
Best regards.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
- Messages
- 16,367
- Likes
- 4,835
Thanks. To me that makes her an even better defendant. Takes the fitness of purpose as a defensive weapon question off the table, if that was actually a question.
Disappointing, but unfortunately not surprising. It almost sounded like he was tossing out a softball. I should know better.
