Are stun wepaons considered "guns"? Is this why the rush to push gun laws

Posted on Sun, Jul. 24, 2005
Taser pushes its stun guns for public
Taser International is offering its controversial stun guns for sale to the general public, raising concerns among police, legal experts and a human rights group.

The manufacturer of the stun guns cops carry on their belts is launching an aggressive marketing campaign to boost sales of the weapon to the public, a move police fear will put a dangerous and largely unregulated weapon on the streets.

The city chosen by Taser International executives to launch the new sales blitz: Miami, beginning Tuesday.

Sales of the weapon -- though banned in eight states -- are legal in Florida, where background checks on buyers are not required by law. Business is already brisk at local stores.

Law enforcement authorities worry that the so-called Taser, which can paralyze its victim temporarily, will get in the hands of criminals. (Gee...ya think?...)
more...
http://www.kansas.com/mld/miamiherald/12208561.htm

by the way...
The day before Kerik quit, it was reported that he had made $6.2 million by exercising stock options he obtained as a board member of Taser, which has sold stun guns to the Homeland Security Department and is seeking more contracts.

Taser itself is under federal and state scrutiny over the safety of its stun guns and accounting issues. The Securities and Exchange Commission is also conducting an informal probe into Taser's safety claims. The company maintains that the guns are safe.

So somebody please tell me why they're starting to sell them to the public NOW?

http://www.nysscpa.org/home/2005/305/4week/article7.htm

Unless it's just pointing out that one big industry (the taser industry) would benefit from the tighter regulation of another big industry (the gun industry). This is true - and something to keep in mind.

Are Tasers better or worse than guns? I don't know - I do know they are both weapons and therefore bad (in a sense), but once you get past that (and you sort of accept that some weapons are probably inevitable), are tasers better?

At first glance, I would say yes, because Tasers generally don't kill and Guns do. But I could be wrong.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

We're all now going to be able to buy tasers.

If tasers are going to be considered "guns", then they would also be covered under the legislation congress pushed out yesterday afternoon to protect gun manufacturers.

Senate Pushes Aside Defense Bill to Debate Liability Shield for Gun Industry July 26, 2005
by Congressional Quarterly

The Senate this afternoon shifted abruptly from consideration of the unfinished $441.6 billion fiscal 2006 defense authorization bill to a fight over legislation that would limit liability for gun manufacturers. A motion to limit debate on the defense bill (S 1042) failed on a 50-48 vote, 10 short of the 60 votes needed. But a second cloture vote, this one to limit debate on a motion to proceed to consideration of the gun liability legislation (S 397), prevailed, 66-32. That effectively pushed the defense bill off the Senate floor and left its fate in doubt. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., brushed aside an offer by Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to set a 7 p.m. Thursday deadline for passage of the defense bill (S 1042). Instead, he said it was imperative that the Senate this week pass legislation that would shield gunmakers from liability lawsuits (S 397). Reid, accused Frist of putting a "powerful special interest group" - the gun lobby - above national security legislation.

dawned on me. They are creating tasers to look like guns. I have a feeling that the design is not necessary and they have done this on purpose.

Looking like a firearm may be a good thing...
- It may dissuade without it being used
- It use is more instinctive, including aiming

There is no such thing as a truly safe weapon, as we have seen with rubber bullets and pepper spray. Then there is the eggshell skull doctrine to contend with.