Tasers may or may not be firearms?

[jody]

Apparently ATF Rulings say if a taser projectile is launched by powder it is a firearm but if it is launched by compressed gas it is not a firearm.

Taser International reports n MS Word format are a useful starting point on the topic, see State Statue Summary and Memorandum of Law.

A number of deaths associated with police using tasers have been reported.

Should ATF classify all tasers as firearms or retain the present ruling that some are firearms and others are not firearms?

EDIT TO ADD THE FOLLOWING FROM THE "Memorandum of Law" LINK ABOVE
QUOTE
Legal Restrictions on Use of TASER Conducted Energy Weapons

A TASER conducted energy weapon is not classified as firearm by the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives since it uses compressed nitrogen gas as the propellant. Therefore, firearms-related regulations do not apply to the sale and distribution of the TASER conducted energy weapon within the United States. A distinction needs to be made with the old Tasertron conducted energy weapon that used black powder for the propellant and was classified as a firearm under U.S. Federal and state regulations. The Tasertron unit is no longer being manufactured.

Some states have enacted regulations restricting the sale and use of inexpensive, hand-held shock devices and these regulations also apply to TASER conducted energy weapons. In many cases, the law enforcement and corrections market is subject to different regulations than the consumer market. Based on a review of current regulations, the following states regulate the sale and use of the TASER conducted energy weapon:
UNQUOTE

[SteppingRazor]

1. I think they should classify none of them as firearms.

Treat them as their own separate, distinct category. This will make legislation regarding Tasers easier to pass in the future, as it will not affect firearms in general, and can thus slide past the protestations of many in the gun-nut crowd.

[Dolomite]

3. What specific legislation is the "gun nut" crowd protesting, re: Tasers?

And what good will it do to legislate something away from the "gun nuts" when it's obviously Government agencies that are the ones in need of Taser-use control?

[Wickerman]

2. DU is currently discussing where Taser threads should be located

We briefly considered the Taser to be a firearm but subsequent research determines the weapon commonly called the Taser is not. If its all right with Jody please feel free to chime in on this thread and let us know where you might want to read Taser-related posts.

thanks!

:hi:

[jody]

4. I agree with Wickerman that regulars in the gungeon should discuss

where taser threads should be posted.

I offer the following observations.

1. ATF has ruled that tasers used to launch projectiles by powder, i.e. gas from burning chemicals, are firearms subject to federal law but, tasers used to launch projectiles by compressed gas are not firearms subject to federal law.

2. Some states prohibit police and citizens from using all tasers, e.g. Massachusetts and New Jersey.

3. Tasers are substitutes for conventional firearms and are clearly lethal under some circumstances.

I propose that most taser threads be moved to the Gun Rights & Gun Control forum.

[Wickerman]

5. One could also argue that the taser is becoming a symbol of the inequality

still present in the US? Is it really a weapons issue, or, is it a civil rights issue that crosses more than the confines of the 2nd Amendment? Early anecdotal evidence seems to suggest the Taser is used disproportionately on non-whites.

I wonder other locations might be Justice, Courts & The Law or Race and Equality?

And, of course, some/many threads clearly are 2nd Amendment issued.

[jody]

6. I understand but some activists want to place controls on tasers similar

to guns. If debate is limited strictly to law enforcement, then the Justice forum might be appropriate but if restrictions will apply to citizens, then tasers become just like traditional firearms.

Taser Intl. touts its product to citizens as a non lethal substitute for firearms. In that sense, I don't see how one can separate debate over tasers from debate over traditional firearms.

[davepc]

7. its about more then the tazer

Its about the police, and the role they play in our society, and how they are becoming more and more removed from the very communities they're entrusted to serve.

The quick draw, force-as-compliance act of using the tazer on a non-threatening -- or otherwise controllable -- suspect isn't about the tool they use to do the job, its about the environment that allows it to happen...in terms of police culture and training, and some greater societal issues at large dealing with our civil rights and the give and take between 'citizens' and LEO's, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the courts, the legal system, and what happens when the 'rubber meets the road' on a daily basis with all this stuff.

In this forum we do a lot of talk about gun control policy, CCW and assault weapons bans, but the broader issues get skirted (IMHO) in lieu of more concrete direct discussions of policy and their effects, pro and con. I don't quite see the direct correlation between the use of the tazer and how it relates to the breakdown of police/society interaction and the right to keep and bear arms.

[Wickerman]

8. excellent point

I don't personally think every thread about a taser belongs here, much as some threads about guns may be better suited elsewhere.

However, the crux o Jody's argument seems to be that the Taser is being considered as an expansion of the terminology of weapon as designed by the framers in the 2A and as such all topics lead back to that weapon definition.

Me, since no one asked? The way the police seem to be using them with what I perceive as a casually scares the crap out of me. There have been numerous fatalities and I hate to think of civilians using them as indiscriminately as it appears the police have been.

It all merits discussion an UNBIASED evaluation. To do so I think all the facts have to be on the table and I support all the threads being dumped in this common area for dissemination. Today. Subject to change. :d

[AX10]

10. Thanks for the insight!

[the nameless one]

9. Tasers

ATF should keep the current definitions for firearms; if states want to limit tasers further in some fashion, it should be done at that level.The definition of a firearm has been specific for quite a period of time, and I see no need to start tampering with it out of some misguided sense of political correctness because the item in question is drawing heat from some quarters.