Considerations - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Self defense and other considerations on crutches Gva Health, Fitness and First Aid 2 02-27-2016 09:24 PM
Moving Considerations? Composticon Urban Survival 4 02-27-2014 01:17 PM
Some considerations for electing a broadhead AllOutdoor.com AllOutdoor.com 1 10-16-2013 12:23 AM
M1911 considerations Steam_Power_Prepper Military Weapons Forum 104 04-10-2013 09:05 PM
BOV Weapon considerations WolfSpring Firearms General Discussion 7 07-26-2012 02:00 PM
Bug Out Bags. And considerations Krzykappy Disaster Preparedness General Discussion 0 09-22-2011 08:36 PM
Important insights and considerations. SamboRoberts Disaster Preparedness General Discussion 6 07-29-2011 06:58 PM
Considerations for relocation Indubious Christian General Discussion 2 04-18-2011 03:29 PM
Downwind Considerations stonecypher Disaster Preparedness General Discussion 6 10-19-2009 09:48 PM
Defensive Considerations forrestdweller Firearms General Discussion 2 08-31-2007 11:00 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-25-2016, 01:47 PM
activepatriot activepatriot is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 172
Thanks: 1
Thanked 46 Times in 22 Posts
Default Considerations



Advertise Here

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed an anti-gun decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, and upheld the 2008 Heller decision in the process. The Massachusetts case involved a 4’11” woman who was being threatened by an ex-boyfriend, who was nearly a foot taller. She pulled a stun gun and chased him away.

While that was good news for her, this is where things got dicey. Her possession of the stun gun violated the Bay State’s ban on “electrical weapons.”

She was tried and convicted, with the state supreme court ultimately holding that her possession of a stun gun was not protected by the Second Amendment since it represented technology that could not have been foreseen in 1791.

But what about speech that is transmitted via computers, radio and TV? Is that not protected by the First Amendment since this technology did not exist in the eighteenth century?

This was the exact point made by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas in their concurring opinion:

Electronic stun guns are no more exempt from the Second Amendment’s protections, simply because they were unknown to the First Congress, than electronic communications are exempt from the First Amendment, or electronic imaging devices are exempt from the Fourth Amendment.


Do you agree or disagree with this? Though, I am an advocate for self-defense, I do not consider any defense device (Defense spray, Taser, Stun Gun.) an arm. I kinda agree with defense devices not being covered by the 2nd amendment, HOWEVER, I do NOT think it should be illegal to own and use a defense device in any state. An individual should have full range of freedom to decide on their defense options. Be it arms, improvised weapons or defense devices.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to activepatriot For This Useful Post:
Old 03-29-2016, 04:59 PM
Matski's Avatar
Matski Matski is offline
Hiker
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 733
Thanks: 2,521
Thanked 992 Times in 453 Posts
Default

Actually had think about this The result is that I have more questions than answers.

Like anything else, it depends on how we look at it. Is a sword "arms"? Historically, yes. Dagger? Kitchen knife? If she chased him off with a Maglite is that an "electronic weapon"? Technically, yes. Her cell phone? Vibrator?

So, would she go to jail for picking up a flashlight but be fine if she was wielding a sword? I mean, is what it has come to?

While a stun gun is easier to qualify as "arms", Pepper Spray or a Taser are not. However, they probably should be. They are a weapon. I can see no reason to ban them anyway. Threatening random strangers online (not really here but elsewhere) is apparently freedom of speech. Doing it face to face is a totally different ball game. It probably shouldn't be so different in the eyes of law.

I often just shake my head at state or local "laws". The stuff they come up with to ban just blows me away. Around 200 people per 100k in my state die from cancer each year. About 15 or so per 100k from firearms (with almost half of it being black on black crime in 2 large cities). Our priorities are kinda messed up right now. Law makers should take a good hard look at what is actually hurting us. They won't though. Playing politics is much more profitable.

Not much help, but would like to see other opinions on this.
Quick reply to this message
Old 03-29-2016, 05:50 PM
wldwsel wldwsel is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,113
Thanks: 593
Thanked 3,253 Times in 1,322 Posts
Default

If he was a threat, she should have had a 1911 and put two in center of mass in two more in the head.

That would have qualified for 2nd Amendment all the way.

That's the way I see it.


WW
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wldwsel For This Useful Post:
 
Old 03-29-2016, 05:51 PM
Dragunov's Avatar
Dragunov Dragunov is offline
TEXAS!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Great Republic of Texas!
Posts: 7,108
Thanks: 10,657
Thanked 11,185 Times in 4,312 Posts
Default

Anything that is physically used as a weapon for self defense, is an "arm". This includes a claw hammer, a tire tool, knife, sword, etc. A person should be able to use any means necessary, to defend themselves.

How does the state of Massachusetts KNOW the Founding Fathers didn't consider technology. They were smarter than we are. Even then, there were Sci-Fi writers who I'm SURE came up with some crazy stuff. These people weren't stupid.
Quick reply to this message
Old 03-30-2016, 12:24 AM
Longranger's Avatar
Longranger Longranger is offline
Hiker
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 742
Thanks: 479
Thanked 758 Times in 360 Posts
Default

Simple enough to consider... what was classified as "arms" back in the day? A pitch fork. A rock. A club. Pretty much anything that could be used as a force multiplier in self defense situations.
Quick reply to this message
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net