Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 9:58 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Tazer 
Author Message
 Post subject: Tazer
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:03 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:56 pm
Posts: 1109
Do you need a license to buy & carry a taser gun? Are the laws similar to gun laws if you needed to use the taser?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:35 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:00 pm
Posts: 1013
Location: North Suburbs
1. No.

2. Not exactly dissimilar, but nowhere near as strict. Sorry, can't find the statute.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:00 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
macphisto wrote:
1. No.

2. Not exactly dissimilar, but nowhere near as strict. Sorry, can't find the statute.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but Taser use would still fall under use of force. It would not, however, fall under use of deadly force.

-Mark


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:29 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:00 pm
Posts: 1013
Location: North Suburbs
I think you're not wrong, Mark.

Quote:
609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE.

Subdivision 1. When authorized. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 2, reasonable force may be used upon or toward the person of another without the other's consent when the following circumstances exist or the actor reasonably believes them to exist:

(1) when used by a public officer or one assisting a public officer under the public officer's direction:

(a) in effecting a lawful arrest; or

(b) in the execution of legal process; or

(c) in enforcing an order of the court; or

(d) in executing any other duty imposed upon the public officer by law; or

(2) when used by a person not a public officer in arresting another in the cases and in the manner provided by law and delivering the other to an officer competent to receive the other into custody; or

(3) when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person; or

(4) when used by any person in lawful possession of real or personal property, or by another assisting the person in lawful possession, in resisting a trespass upon or other unlawful interference with such property; or

(5) when used by any person to prevent the escape, or to retake following the escape, of a person lawfully held on a charge or conviction of a crime; or

(6) when used by a parent, guardian, teacher, or other lawful custodian of a child or pupil, in the exercise of lawful authority, to restrain or correct such child or pupil; or

(7) when used by a school employee or school bus driver, in the exercise of lawful authority, to restrain a child or pupil, or to prevent bodily harm or death to another; or

(8) when used by a common carrier in expelling a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful requirement for the conduct of passengers and reasonable care is exercised with regard to the passenger's personal safety; or

(9) when used to restrain a person who is mentally ill or mentally defective from self-injury or injury to another or when used by one with authority to do so to compel compliance with reasonable requirements for the person's control, conduct, or treatment; or

(10) when used by a public or private institution providing custody or treatment against one lawfully committed to it to compel compliance with reasonable requirements for the control, conduct, or treatment of the committed person.

Subd. 2. Deadly force used against peace officers. Deadly force may not be used against peace officers who have announced their presence and are performing official duties at a location where a person is committing a crime or an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 12:07 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Minneapolis, MN
The taser is not considered a deadly weapon but to use a taser you must be authorized under 609.06 (3) and the use of the taser must be considered reasonable given the circumstance.
If I had to pick between taser and pepper spray, I would opt for the spray.

JimC wrote:
Do you need a license to buy & carry a taser gun? Are the laws similar to gun laws if you needed to use the taser?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: (Sic) Tazer
PostPosted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:22 pm 
Member

Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 5:51 pm
Posts: 40
Location: Cottage Grove, MN
Here is the Minnesota statute that covers Tasers.

http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stat ... id=624.731

Quote:
624.731 TEAR GAS AND TEAR GAS COMPOUNDS; ELECTRONIC INCAPACITATION DEVICES.
Subdivision 1.Definitions.

For the purposes of this section:

(1) "authorized tear gas compound" means a lachrymator or any substance composed of a mixture of a lachrymator including chloroacetophenone, alpha-chloroacetophenone; phenylchloromethylketone, orthochlorobenzalmalononitrile or oleoresin capsicum, commonly known as tear gas; and

(2) "electronic incapacitation device" means a portable device which is designed or intended by the manufacturer to be used, offensively or defensively, to temporarily immobilize or incapacitate persons by means of electric pulse or current, including devices operating by means of carbon dioxide propellant. "Electronic incapacitation device" does not include cattle prods, electric fences, or other electric devices when used in agricultural, animal husbandry, or food production activities.

Subd. 2.Authorized possession; use.

(a) A person may possess and use an authorized tear gas compound in the exercise of reasonable force in defense of the person or the person's property only if it is propelled from an aerosol container, labeled with or accompanied by clearly written instructions as to its use and the dangers involved in its use, and dated to indicate its anticipated useful life.

(b) A person may possess and use an electronic incapacitation device in the exercise of reasonable force in defense of the person or the person's property only if the electronic incapacitation device is labeled with or accompanied by clearly written instructions as to its use and the dangers involved in its use.

Subd. 3.Prohibited possession; use.

(a) No person under the age of 16 may possess or use an authorized tear gas compound except by written permission of a parent or guardian, and no person under the age of 18 may possess or use an electronic incapacitation device.

(b) No person prohibited from possessing a pistol pursuant to section 624.713, subdivision 1, clause (b), may possess or use an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device.

(c) No person prohibited from possessing a pistol pursuant to section 624.713, subdivision 1, clauses (c) to (e), may possess or use an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device, except that the certificate or other proof required for possession of a handgun shall not apply.


(d) No person shall possess or use tear gas or a tear gas compound other than an authorized tear gas compound.

Subd. 4.Prohibited use.

(a) No person shall knowingly, or with reason to know, use tear gas, a tear gas compound, an authorized tear gas compound, or an electronic incapacitation device on or against a peace officer who is in the performance of duties.

(b) No person shall use tear gas, a tear gas compound, an authorized tear gas compound, or an electronic incapacitation device except as authorized in subdivision 2 or 6.

(c) Tear gas, a tear gas compound, or an electronic incapacitation device shall legally constitute a weapon when it is used in the commission of a crime.

(d) No person shall use tear gas or a tear gas compound in an immobilizing concentration against another person, except as otherwise permitted by subdivision 2.

Subd. 5.Prohibited sale.

Except as permitted by subdivision 6, no person shall knowingly furnish or sell tear gas or a tear gas compound to another person. No person shall knowingly furnish or sell an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device to a person prohibited from possessing it by subdivision 3. No person shall knowingly furnish or sell an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device which fails to meet the requirements of subdivision 2. No tear gas, tear gas compound, authorized tear gas compound, or electronic incapacitation device shall be sold or furnished on premises where 3.2 percent malt liquor as defined in section 340A.101, subdivision 19, is sold on an on-sale basis or where intoxicating liquor as defined in section 340A.101, subdivision 13, is sold on an on-sale or off-sale basis. No person shall sell tear gas, a tear gas compound, authorized tear gas compound, or electronic incapacitation device in violation of local licensing requirements.

Subd. 6.Exceptions.

Nothing in this section shall prohibit the possession or use of by, or the sale or furnishing of, tear gas, a tear gas compound, an authorized tear gas compound, or electronic incapacitation device to, a law enforcement agency, peace officer, the National Guard or reserves, or a member of the National Guard or reserves for use in their official duties, except that counties and municipalities may impose licensing requirements on sellers pursuant to subdivision 9.
Subd. 7.Exemption.

Tear gas, tear gas compounds, and authorized tear gas compounds shall not be classified as an obnoxious or harmful gas, fluid, or substance under section 624.732.

Subd. 8.Penalties.

(a) The following violations of this section shall be considered a felony:

(1) The possession or use of tear gas, a tear gas compound, an authorized tear gas compound, or an electronic incapacitation device by a person specified in subdivision 3, paragraph (b).

(2) Knowingly selling or furnishing of tear gas, a tear gas compound, an authorized tear gas compound, or an electronic incapacitation device to a person specified in subdivision 3, paragraph (b).

(3) The use of an electronic incapacitation device as prohibited in subdivision 4, paragraph (a).

(4) The use of tear gas or a tear gas compound as prohibited in subdivision 4, paragraph (d).

(b) The following violations of this section shall be considered a gross misdemeanor: (1) the prohibited use of tear gas, a tear gas compound, or an authorized tear gas compound as specified in subdivision 4, paragraph (a); (2) the use of an electronic incapacitation device except as allowed by subdivision 2 or 6.

(c) The following violations of this section shall be considered a misdemeanor:

(1) The possession or use of tear gas, a tear gas compound, an authorized tear gas compound, or an electronic incapacitation device which fails to meet the requirements of subdivision 2 by any person except as allowed by subdivision 6.

(2) The possession or use of an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device by a person specified in subdivision 3, paragraph (a) or (c).

(3) The use of tear gas, a tear gas compound, or an authorized tear gas compound except as allowed by subdivision 2 or 6.

(4) Knowingly selling or furnishing an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device to a person specified in subdivision 3, paragraph (a) or (c).

(5) Selling or furnishing of tear gas or a tear gas compound other than an authorized tear gas compound to any person except as allowed by subdivision 6.

(6) Selling or furnishing of an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device on premises where intoxicating liquor is sold on an on-sale or off-sale basis or where 3.2 percent malt liquor is sold on an on-sale basis.

(7) Selling an authorized tear gas compound or an electronic incapacitation device in violation of local licensing requirements.

Subd. 9.Local licensing.

(a) For purposes of this section, "municipality" means statutory or home rule charter city or town.

(b) There is hereby conferred upon the governing body of each county, statutory or home rule charter city and town in the state the authority to license the business of vendors of tear gas, tear gas compounds, authorized tear gas compounds, or electronic incapacitation devices within their respective jurisdictions, to impose a license fee therefor, to impose qualifications for obtaining a license, the duration of licenses and to restrict the number of licenses the governing body will issue.

(c) Every person desiring a license from a local governing body shall file with the clerk of the municipality or the county board in the case of application to a county, a verified written application in the form to be prescribed by the local governing body.

(d) The local governing body may establish the grounds, notice and hearing procedures for revocation of licenses issued pursuant to this section. The local governing body may also establish penalties for sale of tear gas, tear gas compounds, authorized tear gas compounds, or electronic incapacitation devices in violation of its licensing requirements.

Subd. 10.Local regulation.

This section shall be the exclusive regulation of the possession, use, and furnishing of tear gas, tear gas compounds, authorized tear gas compounds, and electronic incapacitation devices in Minnesota. This section shall supersede and preempt all regulation of the possession, use, and furnishing of tear gas, tear gas compounds, authorized tear gas compounds, and electronic incapacitation devices by political subdivisions.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:38 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:09 am
Posts: 1060
Location: Savage, MN
tepin wrote:
If I had to pick between taser and pepper spray, I would opt for the spray.


Are you picking as the good guy or the bad guy? If I were a bad guy, (and I'm not), I'd rather be tazed than sprayed.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:48 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:41 pm
Posts: 234
Location: Apple-Mount Farming-Ville

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO76vEX874Q

_________________
NRA Instructor (BP, PPITH, PPOTH, Shothell + Metallic Reloading, RSO)
Certified Glock Armorer

MNbasecamp.com - Minnesota Outdoors Community


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:33 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:16 am
Posts: 364
Location: Minneapolis, MN
I respectfully disagree.

A Taser fires two barbs (projectiles) using compressed air. This would put it under the definition of a "firearm".

Quote:
Minn. Stat. 97A.015 Subd. 19.Firearm.

"Firearm" means a gun that discharges shot or a projectile by means of an explosive, a gas, or compressed air.


Caselaw:

State v. Seifert: the supreme court, as one of three bases for upholding an aggravated robbery conviction, held that a CO2 BB pistol qualified as a “firearm.” 256 N.W.2d 87, 88 (Minn. 1977). State v. Seifert held that the legislature intended a broad definition of "firearm," one not restricted to weapons using gunpowder.

State v. Newman: this court used the definition from Seifert to conclude that a high-velocity air gun, which fired BBs, qualified as a “firearm” under the drive-by shooting statute. 538 N.W.2d 476, 477-78 (Minn. App. 1995)

My advice to a person who wishes to carry a Taser would be to acquire a Permit-to-Carry.

I would also advise them to carry a handgun in addition to the Taser. :mrgreen:


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:05 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
Except air guns are specifically placed in the same category as firearms by statute, and as directly shown above, tasers are not. You do not need a PTC to carry a taser.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:31 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 8:16 am
Posts: 364
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Again, I disagree. There is no statutory exception for the Taser, only "Electronic Incapacitation Devices." When the statute was written, the Taser as we know it did not exist. The "stun guns" the law was written to address did not fire projectiles.

I don't see where the statute clearly allows carrying of a Taser, when it meets the definition of a firearm under both statutes and caselaw.

This would be something to go to test case; alternately the AG could promulgate an opinion about it.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:05 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:11 am
Posts: 225
Location: Farmington, MN
Before folks decide for or against, go get some instruction in the use and deployment of these devices. This instruction should include deployment upon yourself by another. This will indicate to you which you would prefer to use against another. There is a massive reason deployment among LEO's of tazers is WAY up and irritants is just the opposite. The tazer is a far better device for the incapacitation of a threat. Think about the classification wording of a pepper spray or mace, "irritant". Do you want to "irritate" your attacker, or incapacitate them??

If anyone would like to experience a tazer, I'll gladly volunteer to provide you the experience, sans the cartridge and darts unless you care to buy them.

_________________
Duane J
Firearms Education and Readiness
www.fear-mn.com


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:08 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
Erik_Pakieser wrote:
Again, I disagree. There is no statutory exception for the Taser, only "Electronic Incapacitation Devices." When the statute was written, the Taser as we know it did not exist. The "stun guns" the law was written to address did not fire projectiles.


Nope. Look at the mace/stun gun law again:

Quote:
(2) "electronic incapacitation device" means a portable device which is designed or intended by the manufacturer to be used, offensively or defensively, to temporarily immobilize or incapacitate persons by means of electric pulse or current, including devices operating by means of carbon dioxide propellant.


As I understand it, today's Tasers use nitrogen charges. That might be something for the lege to clean up, but the legislative intent is clear.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:18 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:09 am
Posts: 1060
Location: Savage, MN
Duane J wrote:
Before folks decide for or against, go get some instruction in the use and deployment of these devices. This instruction should include deployment upon yourself by another. This will indicate to you which you would prefer to use against another. There is a massive reason deployment among LEO's of tazers is WAY up and irritants is just the opposite. The tazer is a far better device for the incapacitation of a threat. Think about the classification wording of a pepper spray or mace, "irritant". Do you want to "irritate" your attacker, or incapacitate them??

If anyone would like to experience a tazer, I'll gladly volunteer to provide you the experience, sans the cartridge and darts unless you care to buy them.


I've been tazed twice. I'll take that over chemical spray. The tazer turns off after 5 seconds. My only fear would be cracking my head on something as I fell.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:05 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Minneapolis, MN
If I were a good-guy, I would rather use spray than a taser.
Lenny7 wrote:
tepin wrote:
If I had to pick between taser and pepper spray, I would opt for the spray.


Are you picking as the good guy or the bad guy? If I were a bad guy, (and I'm not), I'd rather be tazed than sprayed.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group