Stun "Guns" Illegal?

[pstarr]

So MP5's should be legal for anyone to obtain and carry?

 

[Cruentus]

So MP5's should be legal for anyone to obtain and carry?

Yup.

 

[KenpoTex]

So MP5's should be legal for anyone to obtain and carry?

Yup.

Oh boy...here we go again. For the record, I'm with Paul on this one.

 

[pstarr]

Well, soldiers are also citizens, so....?

 

[Drac]

Tazer International had just started marketing a version for citizen use, not as powerful as the LE version but it works just the same..This will put a crimp in their plans

 

[SFC JeffJ]

So MP5's should be legal for anyone to obtain and carry?

Yes.

A lot of interpretations of the 2nd admendment say we should all own a basic infantrymans kit. I'd put an MP5 in with that. But would rather have the M249 myself.

Jeff

 

[Grenadier]

Stun guns are just another way of putting down the bad guy. Using any "non-lethal" method to accomplish that purpose can have such consequences as well, especially if someone is in rotten health.

Some people might ask "why didn't they use their nightsticks," or "why didn't they use pepper spray?" or some other alternative method. The fact remains, that there are always going to be people who might be rather sensitive to a particular method. As mentioned before, people with heart problems might die from an electrical shock. People with respiratory problems might really suffer adversely from pepper spray / OC, and so forth.

I'll simply counter with this: for the number of people who died from an electrical shock due to a Taser, there are going to be at least that many who would have died from respiratory problems had OC / pepper spray been used, or if the suspect would have been clubbed into submission, or even put in a submission hold. Much like the spherical character who caused that big scene at the McDonald's restaurant (5' 6", 400 lbs), dying from a heart attack when he attacked the police.

It really doesn't matter what methods are used by the police; some people are simply going to die when even "non-lethal" methods are used.

In the end, it is NOT the fault of the police for these people dying. These people had the choice to comply with the law, and not commit the crimes in the first place. They also had the choice to not fight once the police arrived.

This all follows the old adage of "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of the cure."

So MP5's should be legal for anyone to obtain and carry?

Based on the track record of those civilians who lawfully own MP5's, I'd say "yes." People who lawfully own full auto MP5's are not going to be the types to commit crimes, much less using such weapons to commit such crimes.

There has only been a single incident of anyone using a NFA-legal full auto weapon in a crime, and that sole event was when a rogue police officer went on a spree. He could have done that with his issued weapons anyways.

 

[SFC JeffJ]

Stun guns are just another way of putting down the bad guy. Using any "non-lethal" method to accomplish that purpose can have such consequences as well, especially if someone is in rotten health.

Some people might ask "why didn't they use their nightsticks," or "why didn't they use pepper spray?" or some other alternative method. The fact remains, that there are always going to be people who might be rather sensitive to a particular method. As mentioned before, people with heart problems might die from an electrical shock. People with respiratory problems might really suffer adversely from pepper spray / OC, and so forth.

I'll simply counter with this: for the number of people who died from an electrical shock due to a Taser, there are going to be at least that many who would have died from respiratory problems had OC / pepper spray been used, or if the suspect would have been clubbed into submission, or even put in a submission hold. Much like the spherical character who caused that big scene at the McDonald's restaurant (5' 6", 400 lbs), dying from a heart attack when he attacked the police.

It really doesn't matter what methods are used by the police; some people are simply going to die when even "non-lethal" methods are used.

In the end, it is NOT the fault of the police for these people dying. These people had the choice to comply with the law, and not commit the crimes in the first place. They also had the choice to not fight once the police arrived.

This all follows the old adage of "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of the cure."





Based on the track record of those civilians who lawfully own MP5's, I'd say "yes." People who lawfully own full auto MP5's are not going to be the types to commit crimes, much less using such weapons to commit such crimes.

There has only been a single incident of anyone using a NFA-legal full auto weapon in a crime, and that sole event was when a rogue police officer went on a spree. He could have done that with his issued weapons anyways.

Great points and well said.

 

[SFC JeffJ]

I'll also add that you are more likely to find LEO's nowadays with AR type rifles than MP 5's.

 

[thescottishdude]

stun guns are illegal in the UK. Law enforcement barely uses them. but then again everything's illegal in the uk.

 

[CuongNhuka]

stun guns are illegal in the UK. Law enforcement barely uses them. but then again everything's illegal in the uk.

even self defense.