Thought I was posting this here, not over at Mr. Ritter’s blog.
For those interested Eugene Volokh wrote a great article last year about non-lethal force options and the law published in the Stanford Law Review, see link below.
In it he points out that as laws for the carry of firearms have improved, those on carriage of non-lethal arms have not necessarily kept pace. I think this would be a great new additional angle of attack for gun rights groups given that we are winning on gun carriage. After all, we as gun owners would love to have more options for exercising our right to self-defense than just lethal force so why can’t the rules on non-lethal weapons be made more “reasonable”.
February 21st, 2011 at 6:43 pm
Thought I was posting this here, not over at Mr. Ritter’s blog.
For those interested Eugene Volokh wrote a great article last year about non-lethal force options and the law published in the Stanford Law Review, see link below.
In it he points out that as laws for the carry of firearms have improved, those on carriage of non-lethal arms have not necessarily kept pace. I think this would be a great new additional angle of attack for gun rights groups given that we are winning on gun carriage. After all, we as gun owners would love to have more options for exercising our right to self-defense than just lethal force so why can’t the rules on non-lethal weapons be made more “reasonable”.
http://legalworkshop.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/STANFORD-20100210-Volokh.pdf