Michigan court affirms ban on brass knuckles, says right to bear arms doesn't fit
Michigan court affirms ban on brass knuckles, says right to bear arms doesn't fit
A Michigan court says there's no constitutional right to possess brass knuckles in the state. It is a weapon typically associated with violent ambushes in dark alleys and banned in nearly two dozen states.
The Michigan Court of Appeals, in an 18-page opinion, declined to interfere with a 1931 law that carries a five-year prison term for simply having brass knuckles, also known as metallic knuckles.
A “ban on the possession of metallic knuckles falls within the historical tradition of prohibiting the concealed carry of metallic knuckles as a dangerous and unusual weapon,” Judge Christopher Murray wrote in a 3-0 opinion Tuesday.
Brass knuckles are usually a single set of rings that fits on someone’s hand. A punch can inflict serious injuries.
You're viewing a single thread.
America is weird af. Ban brass knuckles but allow semi-automatic weapons that kill thousands every year.
Weird. As. Fuck.
People will still sell them labeled as key-chains or paperweights.
This guy capitals.
They have been doing this for years. They add a little bump and sell it as a belt buckle, or add a little notch and sell it as a bottle opener. Most insane is it is fine to put a knife blade on it and sell it as a knife.
Yep, they sell them as belt buckles. I got one at a gun show because it was cheap, figured why not. I eventually looked up the legality and I would be better off legally if I carried a pistol. Actually crazy lol.
Obviously the answer to the paradox is to have semi-automatic brass knuckles invented.
Reggie Kray on the other side of the sea about self defense:
Afaik it's because there's absolutely no other applications for brass knuckles to work. You can only assault people with brass knuckles.
Fire-arms can be used for "defence" and "hunting".
Edit: inb4 I don't agree with laws around brass knuckles, or most laws about most weapons.
A brass knuckle can also be used for defence.
If you CAN use a firearm for defence, you're not properly storing your firearm...
You don't need large magazines or semi-automatic weapons for hunting...
All the mouth breather Americans are down voting you for simply speaking the truth
If you CAN use a firearm for defence, you're not properly storing your firearm...
Can you explain what you mean by this?
I think what they are trying to say that if you can quickly grab your loaded firearm and be ready for defense, then you are not storing your firearms correctly. Firearms should be locked up and ammo kept separate.
That's insane. Sure when it's being STORED it won't be accessible quickly. But when it's being carried, that's just absurd.
He's tryna be a macho man who lives life on the edge and drives a Hummer. Give their kind a down vote and scroll on friend :)
..what?
If someone attacks you first, and you slip on the brass knuckles before defending yourself, then surely that would be a defensive use?
Yeah this is that kind of rules-lawyering grey area that everybody's too busy to deal with. It's the same issue with the assault rifles and large mags.. they're very clearly weapons of war but they look like guns and all* guns can be used for hunting.
That's bullshit and you know it
Yes... Gun laws in the US are bullshit.
In most states you need a license to carry a gun with you though.
I thought it was to conceal carry? My state I don’t think you need a license for any type of carry though. Which seems pretty legit now, considering. I feel like open carrying is way more sketchy than concealed.
I was walking along the shore in North Myrtle Beach and some jackass had colt .45 in a cowboy holster around his waist. He was walking with another chubby dude who was pretty obviously his friend. Never before have I seen such a fuckin chode
Not anymore. Most states now have constitutional/permitless carry. Doesn't apply if you're a felon, have a history of drug abuse etc etc (varies by state).
In 21/50 you need a license.