What is the logic behind banning things like batons, but keeping handguns legal? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 17, 2024, 10:11:30 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  What is the logic behind banning things like batons, but keeping handguns legal? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What is the logic behind banning things like batons, but keeping handguns legal?  (Read 406 times)
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,800
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

« on: January 25, 2023, 10:51:27 AM »

Because it's easier to get it through the courts.

This is pretty much correct. When I had to rewrite our protests and parades ordinance, we banned a long list of objects that could be used as weapons, from billiard balls, to shields, to thick flagstaffs, to waterguns and water balloons filled with piss, to even simulated or toy guns, but because of constitutional issues we did not ban guns.

In our weapons code carrying nunchucks and ninja throwing stars on the bus is banned but not guns (and I removed the ban on switchblades since those are legal now).

Basically, its a way to do something since there is a gun lobby who sues but not really a mele weapons lobby who does the same. The Supreme Court did rule in Caetano that the 2nd amendment applies to weapons other than guns, but there is very little case law as to what that means as far as the 2nd amendment.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 13 queries.