I really can't understand why there isn't a reasoning for people to be able to carry "stun" guns with them. I believe it would solve so many problems as opposed to an actual with-intent-to-kill gun. If you're at home and have a stun gun and a burglar comes in, you use your stun gun on the attacker and then detain them before the cops arrive. And then when you realize you've stunned the neighbors teenage son (who's plan was to lift that xbox of yours) you won't be in the category of murderer and he'd still be alive but can go to court for his actions. If it was a real burglar and the assailant was able to get that gun away from you and stun you then the worst that would happen is you're incapacitated momentarily and NOT shot dead or have now given the perpetrator a deadly weapon to use around the house to take care of the rest of your family. If you have to carry a gun make it a stun gun. Why not that? I can't see the feasibility of giving everyone an actual gun because think of all the students that get into tussles and their adrenaline is pulsating through their body and they "may" fear for their life by not thinking clearly and would pull out that gun to defend themselves. Instant murder case. If they had a stun gun however the outcome would be much less tragic. Obviously if a criminal wants to get a real gun they would find a way. But if people were to carry stun guns with them they not only protect themselves from being killed, they also protect themselves from being a killer. If people with real guns thought they had less of a chance of getting away with easily killing someone perhaps they'd be less likely to carry out the crime. I practice aikido and I'm all for defending oneself but our main purpose in this martial art is to protect yourself without hurting yourself or killing your attacker in the process.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I really can't understand why there isn't a reasoning for people to be able to carry "stun" guns with them. I believe it would solve so many problems as opposed to an actual with-intent-to-kill gun. If you're at home and have a stun gun and a burglar comes in, you use your stun gun on the attacker and then detain them before the cops arrive. And then when you realize you've stunned the neighbors teenage son (who's plan was to lift that xbox of yours) you won't be in the category of murderer and he'd still be alive but can go to court for his actions. If it was a real burglar and the assailant was able to get that gun away from you and stun you then the worst that would happen is you're incapacitated momentarily and NOT shot dead or have now given the perpetrator a deadly weapon to use around the house to take care of the rest of your family. If you have to carry a gun make it a stun gun. Why not that? I can't see the feasibility of giving everyone an actual gun because think of all the students that get into tussles and their adrenaline is pulsating through their body and they "may" fear for their life by not thinking clearly and would pull out that gun to defend themselves. Instant murder case. If they had a stun gun however the outcome would be much less tragic. Obviously if a criminal wants to get a real gun they would find a way. But if people were to carry stun guns with them they not only protect themselves from being killed, they also protect themselves from being a killer. If people with real guns thought they had less of a chance of getting away with easily killing someone perhaps they'd be less likely to carry out the crime. I practice aikido and I'm all for defending oneself but our main purpose in this martial art is to protect yourself without hurting yourself or killing your attacker in the process.