I think this is MI v Collie & MI v Yanna

Luger_carbine · June 27, 2012, 01:57 PM

Story - Stun gun possession is a right protected by MI & U.S. constitutions:

http://www.freep.com/article/2012062...text|FRONTPAGE

Quote:

The three-judge appeals panel cited a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving handguns which “guarantee(s) the individual the right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation” to find a state law barring the use of tasers and stun guns by private citizens was unconstitutional.

Court doc:

http://www.freep.com/assets/freep/pdf/C4191235627.PDF

Gary L. Griffiths · June 27, 2012, 08:58 PM

Interesting. Although we tend to think of "arms" as firearms, the 2nd Amendment originally applied to swords, bows and arrows, etc.

It's great that some of the state level appellate courts are finally beginning to see the light!

KyJim · June 27, 2012, 09:30 PM

Very nice decision. It not only applied the 2A to tasers and stun guns, it also held the 2A protected open carry in the public. I do wonder if this is to be a published decision.

BTW, a curious point about defendant John Collie (this opinion covered two cases). He was in the process of getting divorced and obtained police assistance to help retrieve insulin and personal items from the home. His wife holds up the stun gun and asks in front of police if that is what he is looking for. Police take the stun gun and charge him with possession. Why didn't they charge her? I'm just sayin'.

Jim March · June 28, 2012, 04:50 AM

An electrifying decision with a shocking conclusion! It will energize our movement, and probably prevent miscreants from committing battery...

OK, I'll shut up now...

Gary L. Griffiths · June 28, 2012, 12:18 PM

Quote:

An electrifying decision with a shocking conclusion! It will energize our movement, and probably prevent miscreants from committing battery...

Where's the :Groan: smiley when you really need it?

June 27, 2012, 08:58 PM	#2
Gary L. Griffiths Senior Member Join Date: April 7, 2000 Location: AZ, WA Posts: 1,466	Interesting. Although we tend to think of "arms" as firearms, the 2nd Amendment originally applied to swords, bows and arrows, etc. It's great that some of the state level appellate courts are finally beginning to see the light! __________________ Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own craven apathy; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the valor of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)

June 28, 2012, 04:50 AM	#4
Jim March Senior Member Join Date: February 14, 1999 Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA Posts: 7,417	An electrifying decision with a shocking conclusion! It will energize our movement, and probably prevent miscreants from committing battery... OK, I'll shut up now... __________________ Jim March

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

June 27, 2012, 09:30 PM	#3
KyJim Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2005 Location: The Bluegrass Posts: 9,142	Very nice decision. It not only applied the 2A to tasers and stun guns, it also held the 2A protected open carry in the public. I do wonder if this is to be a published decision. BTW, a curious point about defendant John Collie (this opinion covered two cases). He was in the process of getting divorced and obtained police assistance to help retrieve insulin and personal items from the home. His wife holds up the stun gun and asks in front of police if that is what he is looking for. Police take the stun gun and charge him with possession. Why didn't they charge her? I'm just sayin'.