Shoot to Stun

New York Times Op Ed, July 2, 2008

1 Pages Posted: 28 Jul 2008

See all articles by Paul H. Robinson

Paul H. Robinson

University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School

Abstract

This New York Times op-ed piece argues that the recent Heller opinion, recognizing a constitutional right under the Second Amendment for a person to hold a loaded firearm in their house, does not have the broad practical implications for greater firearm use that many people seem to assume. It is the criminal law in each state that controls the use of a firearm for defensive force, not the Second Amendment, and those provisions uniformly limit defensive firearm use in dramatic ways. Indeed, as non-lethal weapons become more effective and more available, the use of firearms, which by law constitute lethal force, become increasingly less justifiable under current law.

Keywords: self-defense, non-lethal weapons, criminal law

Suggested Citation

Robinson, Paul H., Shoot to Stun. New York Times Op Ed, July 2, 2008 , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1175283

Paul H. Robinson (Contact Author)

University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School ( email )

3501 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
71
Abstract Views
717
Rank
589,475
PlumX Metrics