Yeah, I do. Stun grenades too.
The "state" is always interested in disarming its subjects. If they have the ability to defend themselves, they are less dependent on the state, and the state must foster dependence in order to grow and expand. The state exists to grow and expand.
The state interest in keeping all citizens defenseless against the state, of course.
I find it very ironic that the states which once rebelled against the abuses of Parliament under King George III now abuse their own citizens in ways and extent barely dreamed of by the old-tyme oppressors.
Well, there's your problem, right there:
...the prosecutor is a flipping idiot.
Yes, stun guns should be protected by the 2nd Amendment.
As should knives, bow and arrows, axe handles, baseball bats, cannons, missiles, RPG's and rubber bands.
And there is not the least bit of sarcasm in my post.
> What would be the compelling state interest that would override the right to self defense for a homeless woman?
The bigger question is why would legislators question any woman’s right to defend herself? I guess we better ask Bill Clinton this one.../s
/johnny
My or any other person’s right of self defense does not come from the government nor the people. I do not recognize any authority or law that would limit that right nor restrict it based on location.
YES is up to 84% now.
Here is a poll for you.
I didn’t think it was all that clear from SCOTUS we could bear arms outside the home.
Yes
I would say it extends to anything that can be answered by the question: “If a citizen desires to do so, could it be used as a defensive or offensive weapon, regardless of how effective it may or may not be”?
That should cover it.
Yes, and I believe it covers potato guns too.
What kinds of speech are protected by the First Amendment? Does the First Amendment only protect speech inside your home?
Same analysis.
Yeah, I do. Stun grenades too.
Thanks to Marktwain for the post and ping!
Direct link to poll:
http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=1129098#.VHnVshKYNok
FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!***
FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. (multiple votes using multiple internetz devices are allowed!)
And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin’, if I miss them.
(looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)
Do you think stun guns should be covered under the second amendment?
Yes 84%
No 16%
Total Votes: 213
Note that the word “guns” does not appear in the 2nd Amendment (2A), the Founders smartly using the vague term arms. Stun guns are reasonably protected by 2A imo.
Guns, swords, fighting knives, clubs, tomahawks, mace, pepper spray -- ANYTHING whose use is to protect oneself from aggression is covered under the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms".
It's for her safety, of course...