The Supreme Judicial Court today dismissed a Revere man's conviction for possession of a stun gun, because the state's current complete ban on their ownership violates the Second Amendment. The ruling could spur legislation to regulate the weapons, similar to the way more traditional guns are.
The state's highest court said the US Supreme Court left it no choice: Stun guns are "arms" under Second Amendment and that:
Therefore, under the Second Amendment, the possession of stun guns may be regulated, but not absolutely banned. Restrictions may be placed on the categories of persons who may possess them, licenses may be required for their possession, and those licensed to possess them may be barred from carrying them in sensitive places, such as schools and government buildings. But the absolute prohibition in [current state law] that bars all civilians from possessing or carrying stun guns, even in their home, is inconsistent with the Second Amendment and is therefore unconstitutional.
In 2015, the SJC had ruled that stun guns were not arms covered by the Second Amendment, but the matter went up to the US Supreme Court, which told the Massachusetts court to think again.