Michigan Criminal Lawyer, Josh Jones

People v Yanna – Stun-Guns Included In 2nd Amendment

Michigan Court of Appeals Expands 2nd Amendment in People v Yanna

In People v Yanna, the Michigan Court of Appeals expanded the Second Amendment to include the use of tasers and stun-guns by private individuals. See People v Yanna. This determination rendered MCL 750.224a unconstitutional, which prohibited the use or possession of such a weapon by private citizens.

The issue regarding the Second Amendment was raised in trial, by a motion to dismiss, explaining that individuals had a right to ?bear? stun-guns because it would qualify under the term ?arms.? The Court of Appeals explained that the Second Amendment encapsulates all versions of ?arms,? including those not forged at the time of its enactment.

However, there are two exceptions to the general rule, which includes those weapons not typically possessed by ?law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes? and a prohibition on carrying ?dangerous and unusual weapons.?

In the end, the court determined that stun-guns do not fit within any of the Second Amendment exceptions and held that a complete ban on that specific weapon is unconstitutional. Further, the court explained that citizens had a right to openly carry the weapon here in the State of Michigan. This holding stemmed from multiple sources, including Dist. of Columbia v Heller, the Second Amendment (allowing the right to ?carry? and ?keep? arms), and the Michigan Constitution (allowing the right to ?bear? arms for self-defense).

PLEASE DO NOT RELY upon any of the information contained in this article when trying to represent yourself. You should always consult with an attorney before relying upon any written advice, article, blog etc.