Protection of other "arms"

J

JN01

New member
Have any post McDonald law suits been filed regarding non-firearm (such as bladed or impact) weapons?

I remember someone filing suit concerning nunchucks, but believe that it was dismissed prior to Heller.

I never understood why in some states (like here in Ohio) you can be licensed to carry a handgun, but still can't carry a knife or anything else as a weapon. Plus, for those who can't or won't carry a firearm, they have no other legal option for self defense other than their bare hands.

It would be nice to have the definition of 2A arms broadened.
 
You can always carry a walking stick,,,

And with a little bit of technique,,,
I would rather have that than a knife.

Pain in the arse to carry,,,
Even when you need one to walk,,,
But with a tad of training it's a very formidable weapon.

Like Gandalf said in the movie,,,
"You wouldn't deny an old man a stick to lean on."

.
 
Some specific nonfirearms laws were aimed at gang members. San Antonio knife ordinances are like that.

Those folks aren't a big constituency for constitutional uproar, I would think.
 
Glenn E. Meyer said:
Some specific nonfirearms laws were aimed at gang members. San Antonio knife ordinances are like that.

Those folks aren't a big constituency for constitutional uproar, I would think.
Click to expand...
True. But I think what the original poster had in mind is the discrepancy among various states' approaches to non-firearms arms.

For example, my home state carry permit is very strictly and specifically limited to handguns. Nothing about it gets me anything with regard to long guns, whether rifles or shotguns, or knives or anything other than ... handguns.

By comparison, my Florida non-resident permit is a "Concealed Weapon or Firearm" license. New Hampshire is "Pistol and Revolver." Pennsylvania is "Firearms."

Surprise, surprise, there is no consistency from one state to another.
 
And with a little bit of technique,,,
I would rather have that than a knife.
Click to expand...

Agreed. A knife is NOT a good self defense weapon at all. It takes a lot of training to know how to handle one and fight with it safely--much more, actually, than it takes to learn how to properly handle and shoot a firearm.
 
I'm with you. If I'm attacked with deadly force, it's a pistol for me. Others may be extremely well trained with a knife. Someone else may not be able to afford a gun and/or proper training to learn how to use one and thus depend upon a staff instead.

I know that improvised weapons are always a possibility and that some objects are especially adaptable as such (canes for example). However, some jurisdictions, such as Ohio, prohibit you from carrying anything (other than a handgun with a license) as a weapon, leaving a legal gray area that could open someone up to criminal prosecution. Is that heavy duty aluminum pen with the sharp pointed end really just a pen? How about that knife that you legitimately carry as a tool? Is it of a type or style that would make certain cops or prosecutors think "weapon"?

None of that should matter. Those laws, like most gun control laws are arbitrary and illogical. Why should anyone be forced to improvise? We should be able to defend ourselves with whatever we feel is appropriate. (Well, OK no flame throwers or claymore mines that take out half the neighborhood along with the bad guy :D)

Individual opinions on what is suitable for self defense will always vary, but I see no reason why options should be so limited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top