« Shortage of shooting ranges | Main | NJ gets access to tracing database »
Taser controversy
Taser is set to produce a lady's version, and the antigun police organizations (I wish they'd interviewed the pro-gun ones, such as Nat'l Sheriffs' Assn) are worried.
(Egad--one concern is that it might be used against police. Look, what's the advantage of a taser over a gun? It lets you capture a resisting individual alive. When was the last time an officer encountered a thug who wanted to capture him alive? And if we actually can find a criminal who is squeamish about killing a cop, and spends $300 for a Taser so as to avoid it -- what's wrong with that?]
I can remember when DC used to outlaw pepper spray and stunning devices (I think Boston still requires a permit to have the spray). Made you rather wonder whose side they were on.
Comments
Oh, if were only the city of Boston. The entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts is protected from unlicensed persons carrying pepper spray, while stunning devices are totally outlawed, even for law enforcement. Why in their infinite wisdom, our politicians have even seen fit to protect us from criminals who might be tempted to use electronic ray guns; yes, they too are outlawed.
Posted by: Ken at August 16, 2007 01:21 PM
"Made you rather wonder whose side they were on."
I don't wonder. I know damn well whose side they're on.
Posted by: jim at August 16, 2007 02:32 PM
I don't wonder either. Nobody needs to mandate helplessness or less effective defenses for someone they do not intend to harm. Period.
Posted by: straightarrow at August 16, 2007 05:39 PM
"used to"?
I was under the impression that DC still banned self defense devices. Of course, in DC they aren't necessary because crime is so low and the MPD is so efficient at solving cases. Oh...Wait a sec...
Posted by: anon at August 17, 2007 10:40 AM