Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:05 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 Previous  1, 2
 Tazer 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:24 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:40 pm
Posts: 2264
Location: Eden Prairie
tepin wrote:
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.


And Fox Labs, at that.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tazer
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:38 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Minneapolis, MN
If a taser were a firearm (which it is not), it would be a "dangerous weapon" as defined in 609.02 - If the taser were a dangerous weapon, its use would be considered "deadly force" which requires all elements of the AOJ-P be present for the tasers use to be lawful. Considering how law enforcement uses tasers currently (for fun maybe), this would indicate that the taser is not considered to be a dangerous weapon and not a firearm. :)


Erik_Pakieser wrote:
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  
 
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 Previous  1, 2

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 35 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