Massachusetts’s stun gun ban will in all probability now be overturned–although the brief opinion from SCOTUS doesn’t require it, but rather demands that the decision upholding it be reconsidered. The judges in Massachusetts had said that stun guns don’t get protection because they were invented after the Constitution was written–a ridiculous position that they would not take for any other right.
Most interesting all this, however, is that the opinion was “per curium,” or “for the court”–meaning there were no dissenters. I find that to be very interesting given that we know some current members of the Court dissented from Heller. Also, of course, this decision opens the door to all manner of self-defense options receiving Second Amendment protection, including, of course, knives, pepper spray, expandable batons, and so on.
It’s always hard to guess what the courts will do in the future but at least we got another good decision out of them.