Posted on 07/02/2008 7:44:56 AM PDT by green iguana
A NARROWLY divided Supreme Court ruled last week that the Second Amendment gives Americans the right to keep a loaded gun at home for their personal use. Presumably, citizens can use these weapons to defend themselves from intruders. But given the growing effectiveness and availability of less lethal weapons, it is likely that state laws will increasingly keep people from actually using their guns for self-defense.
...
Of course, anyone who uses a gun in self-defense may argue that he would have used a less lethal weapon if he had had one at hand, but there was only the firearm. The problem with this argument is that the limited option is the person’s choice, and the law may not be blind to that choice.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Looks like another hideously bad idea from Taser.
Take a Remington 870 and have it launch capacitive-discharge shotgun shells, and hope they hit and deliver an incapacitating charge.
Get a perp who is wound up (PCP, crack, etc) and see how many hits are needed to subdue him. Ask ER Docs & nurses how much conventional pharmacy is needed to get these yoyo’s under control (and then save them when their BP crashes)
Plus any shots in other areas (eyes, particularly) and now you have maimed, but not killed someone.
Understand that taser technology was developed by a guy back in the 70’s, but not commercialized until a Harvard MBA bought out the technology in the 90’s, started a company with his brother, and then hired the guy with a ton of defib patents to make the technology ‘legit’. Only downside is there have been close to 400 deaths from tasering in the past 5 odd years. So now you have a ‘non-lethal’ weapon which can kill, sometimes, and maim, sometimes, and not stop a threat, lots of times. And you want to bet your security on it? Personally, I will leave tasers to LE who have the training and the legal protection (absolute or implicit) to not be bankrupted when using it.
If someone presents enough of a threat to be tased, they present enough of a threat to be ventilated the old-fashioned way.
caveat emptor.
Non-lethals need to look non-lethal or they provoke a lethal response.
I have contacted TASER and asked if they were developing a muti-shot (not just single shot-multi-shock) version.
I have not heard back from them.
Also, anyone that believes (yes, it is a faith thing) that a less-than-lethal tool will prevent a drugged-up, crazed and perverse man or woman from pressing home a potentially lethal attack is, well, smoking something.
In the real world, there is only one kind of “stopping” effect that is viable: A handgun of sufficient caliber and capacity, wielded by a well-trained and determined law-abiding citizen. Nothing less will do. Historical data (law enforcement,civilian and military) proves it.
In order to stop a lethal threat, one must employ a counter-lethal force (in legalese it is called “counter-vailing force”).
Imagine a woman being targeted in a dark parking garage by one man bent of robbing, raping and/or killing her (pick one or more if you wish) and then ask her to face a monster with a weapon that can deliver one moderately accurate shot that must be taken at approx 20 feet or less.... I think she may slap you!
Well, a man can cover 20 feet in less than 2 seconds, which means that this victim must have lightening fast reaction time, dead eye accuracy and nerves of steel to stand and deliver that single shot.... (Oh, by the way, a small percentage of shots that hit in fact do not make skin contact and therefore are ineffective- this increases with the amount of clothing being worn.)
Now, I agree that a similar situation with the victim now armed with a concealable handgun (say either a 5 shot 38 revolver or a similar sized automatic-6-9 shots) still must react quickly enough, aim and fire, and fire, and fire if need be-the goal to STOP the bad guy.
I would not trust my life to a wire-guided CO2 powered single shot electric CNS disrupter.... I would rather attempt to do so with a fighting caliber handgun, with at least one reload and a effective range of 25 yards (with practice and professional training). In fact, I do so all the time.
According to accepted research, firearms are used 14 million times by CIVILIANS per year to stop crimes (w/o a shot being fired). I doubt that a pretty pink TASER would have that effectiveness rate, are you willing to bet your wife's or daughters safety/piece of mind on such a risk?
One other aspect-how do you train with one of these things? I am not all that familiar with training reloads for TASERS, but high quality handgun ammunition costs about $.75 per shot (premium defensive rounds) with genereic practice ammo running at about $.25 per shot. Hmm, lots of practice opportunity for my girls!
Also, several states prohibit the private carry and use of TASERS-oh, well, probably these states do the same with firearms as well; the difference being one is protected by the second amendment to the US constiution (a God-given right to self defense enumerated as the right to keep and bear ARMS).
Okay, buy a TASER if you want one, but rely on a quality combat handgun- I learned long ago in a dark situation, anything with batteries will fail just when you need it most; my firearms can be quickly, almost effortlessly returned to action while immediate action with a TASER is....mail it back to the factory?
I think TASER has a place in the continuum of defense tools, but not the premier position-as the old adage goes” God made all men, Sam Colt made them equal”
God Bless and MOLON LABE
I just viewed the aftermath of the front end loader attack in Jerusalem. Guns blazing was the proper answer to another Muslim/terrorist/pali gone mad. Any other response and the destruction and death were sure to continue.
I think that the Supreme Court, in its wisdom, knew that it could never outlaw handguns and self protection. If you plan to enter my home after I’ve retired for the night, knock loudly and above all don’t attempt forced entry. This is just plain good old common sense.
Oh wait! In most juristictions it's illegal for "civilians" to own cuffs!
I have a Taser because I have kids in the house.
Never had to use it, but have had target practice on downing the bunnies and chipmunks that are eating my flower every summer.
Does work better than the bucket of death method I tried years ago!
Ahhhh, got one beautiful garden right now.
This is really bothering the left. Editorials all over the land about this decision. Too bad. We have the right to defend ourselves and those who depend on us and those weaker than us. No politician and no court can take this right away from us.
No, we didn't. We came within one vote of starting the second civil war. The Left just doesn't get it. We're not giving up our weapons. EVER.
Civilized elections and discourse prevail only as long as your don't literally legislate a class of people's death / enslavement. Do that and you get civil war when you try it against an armed populace.
It was a 5 to 4 decision. If President Obama gets to replace any one of the 5, they will reverse this decision the first chance they get.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
> Get a perp who is wound up (PCP, crack, etc) and see how many hits are needed to subdue him. Ask ER Docs & nurses how much conventional pharmacy is needed to get these yoyo’s under control (and then save them when their BP crashes)
That much is certainly very true. The knife-wielding scroat that got shot in Henderson back in November 2005 had three or four 9mm rounds shot into him by an officer carrying a Glock — and he still kept coming. (Mental patient on P-Methamphetamine).
What stopped him? One lo-velocity rugby-league-playing Samoan parking attendant, who crash-tackled him.
That reason alone is why I sent in a contribution to the McCain campaign. McCain may not be my first choice, but Obama is inconceivable.
You forgot the Republic of Texas.
Right, Texas too, but, I don’t believe that they wrote a specific law covering it, just that the right has been upheld in it’s Supreme Court. I could be wrong, as I spend little time concerned with Texas law. (I found the other states on a google search).
Just heard a story on the radio the other day of a Grand Jury in Texas refusing to charge a guy with murder that killed two punks running from breaking into his neighbor’s home.
“I have a Taser because I have kids in the house.”
And how much training have you had with a Taser?
I remember seeing a COPS episode where this larger man had 5 or 6 different TASERs going on him at the same time, and was also sprayed with pepperspray, beanbagged, and hit with batons multiple times. The man only went down after being shot in the leg, and it still took 6 officers to take him down. The cops said the guy was probably on Meth and PCP.
Rather than continue to make ever more specious arguments against the right of the American people to defend themselves, why don’t leftists just state that everyone in flyover country should be killed. For the greater good of the beautiful people, of course. For the first time, we would see leftists being honest about being leftists.
They are in for a surprise. One councilman from DC even said on TV that the law upholds the DC gun ban! What an idiot!
They had better get ready for a sh** storm of law suits, many have already been filed more are on the way.
Once again, this article is just scared ramblings by a left wing idiot trying to make people afraid to use their guns for self defense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.