Even with Justice Antonin Scalia gone, the SCOTUS ruled against the Massachusetts ban on stun guns, telling the state to go back and get their law in compliance with the 2nd Amendment and Supreme Court rulings.
Constitution and Supreme CourtÂ
The Federalist Papers reported,
Issuing what is called a per curiam decision, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) told the state its ban on stun guns did not comport with recent rulings of the highest court–in particular the Heller decision. Per curiams occur when the high court simply rules directly without assigning the decision to a specific justice and are usually reserved for decisions that the justices feel are so obvious, so non-controversial, that no further discussion is needed.
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
At issue was the case titled Jamie Caetano v. Massachusetts, in which a woman who was being brutally beaten by an ex-boyfriend defended herself with a stun gun. Despite the fact that the device saved her life, police arrested the woman instead of her attacker because stun guns had been made illegal in the Commonwealth.
The stun gun ban carries with it a fine of up to $1,000 and a prison sentence of as much as two and a half years for possession of the banned item. The woman, though, maintained the electronic device should be covered under the Second Amendment because she was legitimately using it for self-protection.
Self-Defense
So basically,  the justices sided with the woman who was defending herself.  It’s a huge victory for the 2nd Amendment. The added plus is that the state of Massachusetts looked foolish before the highest court  in the land. They said the state’s reasoning was faulty and they should revisit their law.
“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.” Supreme Court
The decision was presented without dissenting opinions – which means that the whole SCOTUS  told Massachusetts  to go back and fix their law or abandon it. And for crying out loud, stop putting people in prison for defending themselves with whatever they have to use!
H/T Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children
Related:
- Gun Confiscation Plan in Lexington, Massachusetts
- HR 4269 a Bill to Ensure that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not Unlimited
If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.
