Earlier this year, the Supreme Court suggested a reevaluation of the Constitution, claiming that the Second Amendment should extend to include controlled electronic weapons (CEWs) such as TASER devices.
This ruling followed a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case that convicted Jaime Caetano, a homeless woman, for possession of a CEW. Caetano owned the weapon for her own self-defense against a violent ex-boyfriend.
Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Alito, agrees that the Massachusetts court wrongly thought stun guns were exempt from protection by the Second Amendment.Alito and other Supreme Court officials believe that the laws banning CEWs in the state are outdated, because they date back to the creation of the Bill of Rights – long before TASER self-defense tools and stun guns were even thought of.
Instead, the justices told us that the second amendment applies "to all instruments that constitute bearable arms," even if these weapons were conceived after the founding of our nation.
The struggle that CEWs advocates encounter is that there is not a unified coalition lobbying for the legalization of TASER self-defense tools and stun guns. Compare this to the NRA which provides great support towards responsible gun ownership and litigation, community outreach and general safety initiatives for the public. In some states it is harder to obtain a TASER device than a handgun.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court could not officially declare the categorical ban on CEWs in Massachusetts unconstitutional, and the case was sent back to the state’s court. But, this is a small victory towards nationwide legalization of TASER self-defense tools and stun guns.
Let us know your thoughts on the Caetano case or your stance on the Second Amendment towards CEWs.
Published Sep 8th 2016