Help us find Annie
Self-Defense equals Self-help
Harry Korrell, a resident of Catonsville, MD (until recently considered a "safe," and therefore desirable suburb of Baltimore), writes:
A recent rash of home invasion/burglaries on Melvin Avenue has brought to light a serious issue that needs to be corrected.
Law abiding residents/citizens are being delivered by our politicians into the merciless hands of violent criminals. As a result of three forced entries I sought to purchase a taser for my wife to have at her side when I am not at home. I believe a taser is preferable to a fire arm in these circumstances because it permits escape in the event of a burglar discovering that a resident is at home when he/she may have assumed the residence to be temporarily unoccupied and prevents serious bodily harm - particularly in the event of emotionally driven mistaken identity.
I was amazed to discover that tasers are illegal to possess in most of Maryland – more specifically in Baltimore County and Baltimore City.
Why in the name of heaven are we disarmed in the face of a threat that the police will tell you they are virtually unable to thwart and are restricted to taking action after the crime has been committed.
If one of us dies at the hands of some startled and frightened thug, will the politicians who foisted this nonsense on us suffer or will it be just you and me.
What lapse of logic convinces anyone that denying non-lethal self defense to taxpaying, law abiding citizens will deny such devices to persons already committed to violently breaking laws? And what lapse of logic convinces citizens to vote for those responsible for such disarmament?
I urge repeal of Baltimore County Code § 17-2-104. STUN GUNS.
Straight from the horse's orifice, here's the bill that Mr. Korrell has mentioned (my emphasis and notes added):
§ 17-2-104. STUN GUNS.
(a) Definitions.
(1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated.
(2) (i) “Stun gun” means any portable, electronic shock transmitting device that is designed and intended to incapacitate an individual's neuromuscular system by the discharge of nonprojectible electric current. 1
(ii) “Stun gun” does not include bona fide medical equipment. 2
(3) “Law enforcement personnel” means a full-time member of a police force or other agency of the United States, a state, county, municipal corporation, or other political subdivision who is responsible for the prevention and detection of crime and the enforcement of laws. 3
(b) Prohibition.
(1) Except for law enforcement personnel while in the performance of official duties4, a person may not use, possess, or discharge a stun gun.
(2) A person may not sell, offer to sell, rent, offer to rent, transfer, or offer to transfer a stun gun to a person unless the person is law enforcement personnel.
(c) Penalty. A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or both.
A few observations:
*1 - As I read "nonprojectible electric current," this law means that a TaserTM would not be prohibited under this law.
*2 - Considering the variety of non-traditional medical treatment available, this seems wide open to interpretation. Whether or not a TENS unit could deliver an incapacitating shock might be an interesting experiment. The product literature that comes with these devices cautions users that there are several locations where TENS electrodes ought not be attached, as the current could result in seizure or cardiac arrhythmia. Whether this information is usable remains to be demonstrated.
*3 - Since our county police are largely involved in showing up after a crime is reported, and taking a report from witnesses, a person might well ask whether the average policeman or policewoman is a "law enforcement officer," under this definition.
*4 - This clause would lead a person to think that even someone falling under the more strict definition of "law enforcement personnel" in footnote 3 would be required to store his stun gun at the police station when going off duty, or otherwise keep it secured and rendered inoperable, as many local firearms laws require citizens to do.
It is not altogether surprising that thugs and crooks have begun to ply their trade in communities such as Catonsville and Columbia, renowed for being safe places where relatively affluent people live. As Willie Sutton ïs rumored to have replied when asked why he robbed banks, "That's where they keep the money."
-30-