and some of the hoplophobe and gun bigot arguments against it. All good, but I'm going to take one line of one of the bigot argument then his response. Argument:
And there are always other, less-lethal weapons, that you don’t need a permit for.
And part of Weer'ds' response:
Of course Baldr is an anti-gun shill in Oregon which is pretty damn nice when it comes to gun ownership, and overall freedom. Here in Massachusetts, the most popular less lethal weapons, Electronic Stun Devices, and Pepper Spray are heavily restricted. The Stun Guns and Tasers are outright illegal here, and you can only posses pepper spray if you have a gun permit. Also while there is a Class D LTC that is $25, shall-issue and only covers chemical sprays, the whole legal classification of a tin of pepper as “Ammunition” means that if a college student gets jumped by a drunk frat boy, and she escapes sexual assault because she pepper sprays him…she’ll be expelled for carrying “ammunition” on campus.
Which, besides pointing out some of the idiocies of law in the PROM, knocks the 'don't need a permit for' argument out the window; hard to say that when virtually ANYTHING actually intended as a defensive weapon requires permits and fees and other bullshit in some places.
Again, we are reminded that the "License guns just like cars" demand from the hoplophobes and bigots is bullshit: if you actually did gun licensing just like a drivers license they'd shit their pants and give birth to armadillos.
Both at the same time.