Supreme Court Sound Bites

Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)

FEEDBACK BEFORE YOU LISTEN
album-art

Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)

Does an individual have a right to carry a stun gun?
  • 1
    Jaime Caetano v Massachusetts – Syllabus Sound Bites – Facts of the case
    0:16
    Sound Bite: Facts of the case. In this case, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, upheld a Massachusetts law prohibiting the possession of stun guns, after examining “whether a stun gun is the type of weapon contemplated by Congress in 1789, as being protected by the Second Amendment.”
  • 2
    Jaime Caetano v Massachusetts – Syllabus Sound Bites – The Second Amendment extends to arms that were not in existence at the time of the founding.
    0:25
    Sound Bite: The Second Amendment extends to arms that were not in existence at the time of the founding The court offered three explanations to support its holding, that the Second Amendment does not extend to stun guns. First, the court explained that stun guns are not protected, because they “were not in common use[...]
  • 3
    Jaime Caetano v Massachusetts – Syllabus Sound Bites – Stun guns are [not] “unusual”, because they are “a thoroughly modern invention”.
    0:36
    Sound Bite: Stun guns are [not] “unusual”, because they are “a thoroughly modern invention”. The court next asked, whether stun guns are “dangerous per se at common law, and unusual,” in an attempt to apply one “important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms,” (referring to “the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying[...]
  • 4
    Jaime Caetano v Massachusetts – Syllabus Sound Bites – Stun guns [need not be] readily adaptable to use in the military.
    0:16
    Sound Bite: Stun guns [need not be] readily adaptable to use in the military. Finally, the court used “a contemporary lens,” and found “nothing in the record to suggest that stun guns are readily adaptable to use in the military.” But Heller rejected the proposition “that only those weapons useful in warfare are protected.”
  • 5
    Jaime Caetano v Massachusetts – Syllabus Sound Bites – Order
    0:12
    Sound Bite: Order The judgment of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.
Jaime Caetano v Massachusetts – Syllabus Sound Bites – Facts of the case
00:00
-0:16
FEEDBACK AFTER YOU LISTEN
Return to all the Supreme Court opinions
Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

What is your opinion BEFORE you listen to the Supreme Court sound bites?

Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016): Should an individual have a right to carry a stun gun?