SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the founding-fathers-didn't-have-tazers dept.
Massachusetts' ban on the private possession of stun guns—an "electrical weapon" under the statute—does not violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms, the state's top court has ruled.
The decision says ( http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/stungunMA-ruling.pdf ) (PDF) that the US Constitution's framers never envisioned the modern stun-gun device, first patented in 1972. The top court said stun guns are not suitable for military use, and that it did not matter whether state lawmakers have approved the possession of handguns outside the home.The court, ruling in the case of a Massachusetts woman caught with stun gun, said the stun gun is a "thoroughly modern invention" not protected by the Second Amendment, although handguns are protected.
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Tuesday March 10 2015, @06:19PM
While I did figure out how to modify an AK type weapon in fairly short order (can a semi-auto firearm get much simpler than one of these?) you are correct in that one would be a fool to actually proceed with any such modifications for the exact reasons you cite. My impression of the AK was that it wouldn't even take a skilled gunsmith just someone who can use a hacksaw and files to fabricate something of reasonable quality. The modification I thought of would not have been permanent so the fact that others have likely had similar thoughts and implemented them shouldn't be a surprise. Also full auto is good for expending copious amounts of ammo but not much else. Granted with an AK that would only come out to about $7 per 30 round mag but that still gets expensive quick. Then again I am someone who follows the law and if I get a desire to waste some money one of the gun ranges nearby well rent you one and you don't have to deal with acquiring (legal or otherwise) and maintaining the thing either.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone