A Bay County judge ruled today, though, that the Michigan law prohibiting possession of stun guns is unconstitutional.
http://www.mlive.com/news/bay-city/inde ... ays_s.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't think that a ban on switchblades is the same thing. He ruled that the state could regulate but not outright ban stun-guns. If they had a outright ban on knives, then he would rule the same way. But a ban against switchblades would not be, since they were not banning knives, just regulating the kinds you could and could not use. IANAL, YMMV.WildBill wrote:Interesting. I imagine this ruling will be appealed. It seems like a ban on switchblade knives would also be unconstitutional according to this judge.
It also seems Yanna was a convicted felon and he can not have a firearm. I guess the stun gun was his only choice for protection.At the time, Yanna said he wasn’t aware of the law and his father in Texas had given him the stun gun. Yanna’s coworker had a handgun in a holster on his hip when police visited the store, but the worker wasn’t charged with any crime because it is legal to carry a firearm without a permit so long as it is not concealed.
Good points.JJVP wrote:I don't think that a ban on switchblades is the same thing. He ruled that the state could regulate but not outright ban stun-guns. If they had a outright ban on knives, then he would rule the same way. But a ban against switchblades would not be, since they were not banning knives, just regulating the kinds you could and could not use. IANAL, YMMV.WildBill wrote:Interesting. I imagine this ruling will be appealed. It seems like a ban on switchblade knives would also be unconstitutional according to this judge.