Illinois Will Require Background Checks for Stun Guns

This is ridiculous! The governor of Illinois just signed a bill into law that will require people to go through the same sort of checks to buy a non-lethal stun gun as they do real firearms.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed legislation Friday approving the restrictions, which go into effect Jan 1. In addition to submitting to a criminal background check and waiting period, stun gun owners in Illinois will be required to have a state firearm owners identification card.

One reason people buy stun guns instead of real guns is because they prefer not to carry around a deadly weapon. Another BIG reason is so that they can avoid the hassle of the paperwork, background check and waiting period. The concept behind waiting periods with firearms is to theoretically prevent a person from buying a gun while in the throes of rage, and then immediately using it to kill the person they are mad at. The anti-gun crowd feels that this "cooling off" period will save lives (though this hasn't been proven). It is absurd to take this concept and apply it to a non-lethal defense tool. People don't buy stun guns to commit murders; they buy them for self defense either because they are scared or because they want to be prepared.

Lately the news media has been gleefully reporting the horrors of stun guns and tasers. Every time a person is injured or killed by a stun gun, there are stories about how dangerous and deadly these devices are. I believe this is just a current media fad, and is akin to the bursts of "shark attack" stories and other unusual deaths that the media focuses on for a few weeks before moving on to a new type of tragedy. Keep in mind that these stun guns are everywhere. Tens of thousands of police, military and civilian personnel carry these devices yet very few deaths and injuries are reported.

ANYTHING can be used to inflict death. Hammers, rocks, cars, gasoline, etc., can be used to kill both intentionally and accidentally. Stun guns fall in this same category: they are not intended to kill or even harm, and if used correctly they rarely result in death or injury.

States do not have the moral right to sit in judgment of their citizens and decide who is entitled to defend themselves from rapists, muggers and the like. It is unfortunate that they often end up with the legal right to do this in spite of morality.