"Tactical" flashlight outlawed in MA, USA?

\"Tactical\" flashlight outlawed in MA, USA?

I've been studying the laws so I can get a pistol and OC spray permit. Here's what I came across which along with stun guns also seems to outlaw the kind of flashlights whose bright beam we all appreciate might "temporarily incapacitate" an attacker, however briefly.

Do you think I'm reading too much into it?

(source) [I did the bold emphasis]

[ QUOTE ]
Chapter 140: Section 131J. Sale or possession of electrical weapons; penalties.

Section 131J.
No person shall sell, offer for sale or possess a portable device or weapon from which an electrical current, impulse, wave or beam may be directed, which current, impulse, wave or beam is designed to incapacitate temporarily, injure or kill. Whoever violates the provisions of this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than two years in a jail or house of correction, or both.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mean, if a company such as Surefire or Tigerlight for example makes a big deal out of using one their bright lights to temporarily incapacitate an attacker using the blinding beam, then it seems that it could be easily argued in court that I've violated that law by carrying one of those particular flashlights with me. The more I learn these laws the worse it gets.

Re:

This law wouldn't make sense, because then they'd have to outlaw every single car on the road because their high beams can temporarily incapacitate other drivers.

You can make an argument that ANY flashlight, regardless of whether or not it's designed to be bright enough to incapacitate, has the ability and function to do so, and thus, ALL flashlights are then illegal to possess.

In a nutshell, if this law's challenged in court, it's toast. It won't stand...

Re:

I think (and hope) that by BEAM, they mean those new stun lasers they have or another non-lethal weapon, but NOT a flashlight.
Here is a link that mentions the words, BEAM and ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE, describing a new non-lethal weapon and how it works.
http://www.iwar.org.uk/news-archive/2001/military/03-02-01.htm
I hope this is what the law refers to.

CURRENT-I guess this means stun guns, tasers etc. and I think I remember reading that these (and even slingshots!), and as you know, OC spray, are illegal or require permits in MA.


However, most laws rarely cover every situation, leaving some gray areas that are open for interpretation. For instance, a light might be viewed as a weapon if it were used to blind someone driving a vehicle, and causing an accident. But if a person is not messing around like this, I doubt they would hassle you for carrying and using the light for illumination.
But, unfortunately, sometimes justice is biased and nearly ANYTHING can get a person in trouble if done and seen at the wrong place and time, even perfectly innocent actions.

Re: \"Tactical\" flashlight outlawed in MA, USA?

binky- trust me on this one... you're safe with the SureFire/Tigerlight, etc..

It was written for stun guns, hand-made electrode "cow-prods", tasers, and miscellaneous fashioned weapons by its own definition in the subsection for the category mentioned.

-Jim

Re:

Wow, okay. Given gyverpete's article on aiming a heat "beam" for military uses, I guess I can hope that's what the law was written for stun guns and other similar things. I sure hope it can't be used against light sources. That'd be so incredibly rediculous... wait, what am I saying? This anti-stun gun law is already rediculous.

Thanks for the responses guys. I come from an engineering family and have never been able to fathom the twisted thinking in the land of legality.

Re:

Imagine a flashlight that could injure or kill.....I think they call them light sabers!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Cheers,
Kev

Re:

What it is ALL about, is totally DISARMING the people. Once disarmed, then takeover is possible. That is why the Second Amendment is written and placed as an Individual Right (not requirement).


It is like including the phrase "or anything that CAN be USED as a WEAPON." The words I put in caps, are the key words, particulary "CAN"

The phrase is ALL emcompassing, because EVERYTHING can be used as a weapon, and, this includes the Human BODY.

This phrase exists in a rather obscure law that is part of the U.S. Code, as revised, that makes it a FELONY for the DISABLED (all kinds) to own or possess any weapon, or anything that can be used as a weapon. Taken to it LOGICAL conclusion, it currently ILLEGAL to be alive IF you are DISABLED, as the weapons must be confiscated.

And how do you confiscate a person's BODY without KILLING said person?? I know of no way to do so.

This law was part of a crime bill that was enacted BEFORE CLinton, under a Republican President!!

It is the wording that got me. Were they aware of how far this would go??? Maybe, maybe not.

Also remember that there is definite conflict of interest when Lawyers are writing the Laws, as they are going use language that only Lawyers can fathom!!!!

Re:

Okay Charles -- How many cups of coffee have you had today? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Just joking around of course.

Re:

anything coming out of ma,ny,ca and any other nazi state never surprises me.

Re:

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twak.gif
Aargh... Where's Heston when you need him...

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

Re:

Mr. Bradshaw:

I would like to see a reference to your statment that you cannot own a weapon if you are disabled.

I know you cannot own a firearm if you are under a disability, the disability being, a felony conviction, mental disability, or have been convicted of a domestic abuse crime.

I don't believe there is anything in that law that pertains to a physical disability.

I have seen people in wheelchairs at gun shows both buying and selling firearms. They are in full view of police officers who are guarding the area. I have never seen a disabled person arrested for buying or selling weapons at a gun show.

Re:

LMAO! I just noticed Tombeis' new signature line... man that made me crack up! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Sorry - straying off topic...

Re:

reading this: [ QUOTE ]
device or weapon from which an electrical current, impulse, wave or beam may be directed, which current, impulse, wave or beam is designed to incapacitate temporarily, injure or kill.

[/ QUOTE ]

it is talking about electrical emission. Although a lot of lightsources depend on electricity to produce light, I ( as a non English speaking person) do not think they consider emitted photons as emitting something "electrical"... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

Of course I have been proven wrong before... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Re:

MA,NY,CA I just don't understand how your laws got so TWISTED! In Texas, a bright flashlight is used for seeing what you're shooting at. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

SRB

Re:

Shoot? You think we're allowed to shoot projectiles???

Guns not available for sale in MA (seems basically to be a use of "consumer protection laws" to eliminate all handgun availability in MA)

I can't even buy a cap gun for my kiddies in this country. (Go ahead -- show me a link to a new gun & caps) And what's growing up in the U.S. without the fun of taking an entire roll of caps, setting it carefully onto a rock and landing the biggest hammer you can wield down on top of it? Nope, none of those available. We wouldn't want our kiddies pretending to shoot the endangered alligators at Georgia's Okefenokie Swamp. Nope. Bad influence; Bad daddy.

Pardon my rant. I'm just feeling like there are a lot of liberties we used to take for granted that are now gone, regardless of the rationale. Maybe as soon as I'm finally thinking I'm done with my perpetual schooling I'll suggest moving the family to a state that'll just leave us alone to do what we want. That Libertarian State idea is sounding pretty good this morning.

Re:

Hey Bart, that's a particularly good catch that the flashlight does not actually emit electrical energy. I'll have to think some more about it, but it seems a pretty good distinction.

[edit] BTW to all reading-- I'm thinking I'll stop posting to this topic, just because it seems like it's getting maybe a little stale and I don't want to bug people with it by keeping it up on top due to my tagging onto the end. Sure seemed like a wierd law to me though. But I agree, MA is a wierd state anyway. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon23.gif

Re:

[ QUOTE ]
SRB said:
MA,NY,CA I just don't understand how your laws got so TWISTED! In Texas, a bright flashlight is used for seeing what you're shooting at. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup! And in Washington (the state, not the other one) "Gun Control" still means hitting what you aim at ... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif