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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 10 2015, @07:30PM
So you think MRI machines, CAT scanners, the Bible, Quran, Torah, gasoline, pens, pencils, paper, gavels, computers... No, wait, this will save time - the military uses pretty much everything, nearly every job that exists in the civilian word has a military equivalent, so you're saying every tool and every thing are "military tools". The point of using descriptive adjectives is to narrow down the meaning of the word. If "military tool" is used a synonym for "tool", then you saying "[they] are military tools" is the exact same as saying "[they] are tools", and the phrase "military tools" is meaningless.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday March 10 2015, @11:30PM