Legality in Different States

[Glenn E. Meyer]

https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Supply-Pepper-Spray-Defense/dp/B01NBAFRQJ

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/05/16/pepperball-lifelite-non-lethal-personal-defense/

An ad for these popped up as I was browsing. I suppose folks have comments on their utility. However, I was wondering as to their legality across various states. One ad said they won't ship to MA or NY.

Just curious - so I don't need a lecture on whether they work (I know that will happen anyway). I just like legal issues. Is Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. ___ (2016) , a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously vacated a Massachusetts conviction of a woman who carried a stun gun for self-defense, relevant?

[RevolverRob]

Probably not legal in Chicago just because.

We had a pepper spray ban until last year, here. Now we have a city ordinance that makes it a crime to "discharge pepper spray/gas in an enclosed class C-1 or C-2 space". Whatever the hell that means.

I'm not familiar with the details of Caetano v. Mass. was that a broad or narrow ruling? I.e., did they rule that stun guns are legally protected by the 2A or did they merely vacate the conviction for other reasons?

[TGS]

https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Supply-Pepper-Spray-Defense/dp/B01NBAFRQJ

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/05/16/pepperball-lifelite-non-lethal-personal-defense/

An ad for these popped up as I was browsing. I suppose folks have comments on their utility. However, I was wondering as to their legality across various states. One ad said they won't ship to MA or NY.

Just curious - so I don't need a lecture on whether they work (I know that will happen anyway). I just like legal issues. Is Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. ___ (2016) , a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously vacated a Massachusetts conviction of a woman who carried a stun gun for self-defense, relevant?

Caetano should apply if it's incorporated in whatever federal district you're inquiring about.
'
AFAIK they are illegal in NJ as it is not "pocket sized" and also dispels more than .75oz of irritant:


i.Nothing in N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent any person who is 18 years of age or older and who has not been convicted of a felony, from possession for the purpose of personal self-defense of one pocket-sized device which contains and releases not more than three-quarters of an ounce of chemical substance not ordinarily capable of lethal use or of inflicting serious bodily injury, but rather, is intended to produce temporary physical discomfort or disability through being vaporized or otherwise dispensed in the air. Any person in possession of any device in violation of this subsection shall be deemed and adjudged to be a disorderly person, and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $100.00.

I think a person would also run the risk of being a test case in NJ as under any safety standard a paintball gun is capable of inflicting serious bodily injury if appropriate PPE isn't used. So there's a possible third strike in NJ that I don't think is a stretch.


I'm not familiar with the details of Caetano v. Mass. was that a broad or narrow ruling? I.e., did they rule that stun guns are legally protected by the 2A or did they merely vacate the conviction for other reasons?

The former.

[BehindBlueI's]

It would be legal in Indiana, no special permit required. Only handguns and ECDs that launch probes require a license here.

[StraitR]

The only restriction on defensive chemical sprays in Florida is on volume, where one person is limited to 2 ounces. At a minimum, it would seem there would be a virtual "magazine capacity" issue based on chemical volume per ball. That said, from what I know of Florida Chapter 790 (https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2017/Chapter790) which covers Weapons and Firearms, a pepper-ball "gun" may be outside the scope of current legislation and present a grey area open to (mis)interpretation.

[CleverNickname]

Texas PC 46.05 prohibits possession of "chemical dispensing devices" and PC 46.01 defines them as

(14)"Chemical dispensing device" means a device, other than a small chemical dispenser sold commercially for personal protection, that is designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of dispensing a substance capable of causing an adverse psychological or physiological effect on a human being.

A successful argument could probably be made that neither the pepperball gun itself nor the capacity of the pepperballs it carries fit the definition of "small."

[Peally]

In WI you can't buy pepper spray online. Makes getting bear spray for hiking pretty retarded.

Naturally, you can buy a handgun or shotgun over the shelf no problem. But pepper spray is scary. Unless these are sold over the shelves it can't even become an issue.

[Kukuforguns]

Is Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. ___ (2016) , a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously vacated a Massachusetts conviction of a woman who carried a stun gun for self-defense, relevant?
Relevant? Yes.
Is Heller relevant? Yes.
Is McDonald relevant? Yes.
Are any of them dispositive? No.

[Hambo]

Whether or not they're legal in states using one would violate any number of "discharging a firearm within city limits" ordnances. But Hambo, it's not a firearm. I would agree but our ordnance was written so that any launched projectile was a crime. It was a misdemeanor, but that could vary as well.

And because I can't resist:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jCr8QSGYss

[VT1032]

This thread kind of blows my mind. I had no idea pepper spray was this regulated... I always just assumed pepper spray would be fine because its just pepperspray. Massachusetts wants you to have a fucking firearms card and only lets you buy it through FFLs with a background check...

[TGS]

This thread kind of blows my mind. I had no idea pepper spray was this regulated... I always just assumed pepper spray would be fine because its just pepperspray. Massachusetts wants you to have a fucking firearms card and only lets you buy it through FFLs with a background check...

New Jersey's thinking is that only a rapist needs more than .75oz of pepperspray on their person as .75oz is enough for self defense, but that rapists are thwarted because if you only have .75oz then you are unable to use it in order to effectuate a rape/kidnapping.

Logic.

[Hambo]

New Jersey's thinking is that only a rapist needs more than .75oz of pepperspray on their person as .75oz is enough for self defense, but that rapists are thwarted because if you only have .75oz then you are unable to use it in order to effectuate a rape/kidnapping.

Logic.

That kind of logic makes my brain hurt.