Electroshock weapon


An electroshock weapon is an incapacitating weapon. It delivers an electric shock aimed at temporarily disrupting muscle functions and/or inflicting pain without usually causing significant injury.
Many types of these devices exist. Stun guns, batons, and belts administer an electric shock by direct contact, whereas TASER conducted electrical weapons fire projectiles that administer the shock through thin flexible wires. Long-range electroshock projectiles, which can be fired from ordinary shotguns and do not need the wires, have also been developed.
Though the two terms are often used interchangeably, stun guns are actually direct contact weapons that work mainly through pain compliance by affecting the sensory nervous system. It can also cause some muscular disruption, but that generally requires 3-5 seconds of direct contact. In comparison, a TASER device is a long range weapon that incapacitates the target by disrupting voluntary muscular control through the motor nervous system.

History

In 1935 Ciril Diaz of Cuba designed an electroshock glove.
Jack Cover, a NASA researcher, began developing the TASER in 1969. By 1974, he had completed the device, which he named after his childhood hero Tom Swift. The TASER Public Defender used gunpowder as its propellant, which led the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to classify it as a firearm in 1976.
Cover's patent was adapted by Nova Technologies in 1983 for the Nova XR-5000, their first non-projectile hand-held style stun gun. The XR-5000 design was widely copied as the source for the compact handheld stun gun used today.

Principle of operation

Electroshock weapon technology uses a temporary high-voltage, low-current electrical discharge to override the body's muscle-triggering mechanisms. Commonly referred to as a stun gun, electroshock weapons are a relative of cattle prods, which have been around for over 100 years and are the precursor of stun guns. The recipient is immobilized via two metal probes connected via wires to the electroshock device. The recipient feels pain, and can be momentarily paralyzed while an electric current is being applied. Essential to the operation of electroshock, stun guns and cattle prods is sufficient current to allow the weapon to stun. Without current these weapons cannot stun and the degree to which the weapon is capable of stunning depends on its proper use of current. It is reported that applying electroshock devices to more sensitive parts of the body is even more painful. The maximum effective areas for stun gun usage are upper shoulder, below the rib cage, and the upper hip. High voltages are used, but because most devices use a less-lethal current, death does not usually occur from a single shock. The resulting "shock" is caused by muscles twitching uncontrollably, appearing as muscle spasms.
The internal circuits of most electroshock weapons are fairly simple, based on either an oscillator, resonant circuit, and step-up transformer or a diode-capacitor voltage multiplier to achieve an alternating high-voltage discharge or a continuous direct-current discharge. It may be powered by one or more batteries depending on manufacturer and model. The amount of current generated depends on what stunning capabilities are desired, but without proper current calculations, the cause and effect of high voltage is muted. Output voltage is claimed to be in the range of 100 V up to 6 kV; current intensity output is claimed to be in the range of 100 to 500 mA; individual impulse duration is claimed to be in the range of 10 to 100 µs ; frequency of impulse is claimed to be in the range of 2 to 40 Hz; electrical charge delivered is claimed to be in the range of 15 to 500 µC ; energy delivered is claimed to be in the range of 0.9 to 10 J.
The output current upon contact with the target will depend on various factors such as target's resistance, skin type, moisture, bodily salinity, clothing, the electroshock weapon's internal circuitry, discharge waveform, and battery conditions.
Manufacturers' instructions and manuals shipped with the products state that a half-second shock duration will cause intense pain and muscle contractions, startling most people greatly. Two to three seconds will often cause the recipient to become dazed and drop to the ground, and over three seconds will usually completely disorient and drop the recipient for at least several seconds. TASER International warns law enforcement agencies that "prolonged or continuous exposure to the TASER device’s electrical charge" may lead to medical risks such as cumulative exhaustion and breathing impairment.
Because there was no automatic stop on older model TASER devices, many officers have used it repeatedly or for a prolonged period of time, thus potentially contributing to suspects’ injuries or death. The current X26 model automatically stops five seconds after the trigger is depressed and then the trigger must be depressed again to send another shock. The trigger can be held down continuously for a longer shock or the device can be switched off before the full five seconds have elapsed. The devices have no protections against multiple police officers giving multiple shocks, cumulatively exceeding the recommended maximum levels.

Countermeasures

There is a fabric that purports to protect the wearer from TASER devices or other electroshock weapons.

Commercially available varieties

Compact stun guns

The compact handheld stun guns are about the size of a TV remote or calculator, and they must touch the subject when used. The original XR-5000 design in 1983 had the electrodes spread farther apart to make the noisy electric arc between the electrodes as a more visible warning. Some such devices are available disguised as other objects, such as umbrellas, mobile phones or pens.

Electric shock prods

The larger baton-style prods are similar in basic design to an electric cattle prod. It has a metal end split into two parts electrically insulated from each other, or two thin projecting metal electrodes about apart, at an end of a shaft containing the batteries and mechanism. At the other end of the shaft are a handle and a switch. Both electrodes must touch the subject. In some types the sides of the baton can be electrified to stop the subject from grasping the baton above the electrodes.
Some models are built into long flashlights also designed to administer an electric shock with its lit end's metal surround.

Stun belts

A stun belt is a belt that is fastened around the subject's waist, leg, or arm that carries a battery and control pack, and contains features to stop the subject from unfastening or removing it. A remote-control signal is sent to tell the control pack to give the subject an electric shock. Some models are activated by the subject's movement.
The United States uses these devices to control prisoners. One type is the REACT belt. Some stun belts can restrain the subject's hands and have a strap going under his groin to stop him from rotating the belt around his waist to reach its battery and control pack and trying to deactivate it. Stun belts are not generally available to the public.

Stun shields

Stun shields are shields with electrodes embedded into the face, originally marketed for animal control, that have been adopted for riot control.

TASER Conducted Energy Weapons

A TASER conducted energy weapon is a handheld weapon that fires two small dart-like electrodes which remain connected to the main unit by conductors. It delivers electric current to disrupt voluntary control of muscles resulting in pain and broad "neuromuscular incapacitation".

Wireless long-range electric shock weapon

has developed a long-range wireless electro-shock projectile called XREP, which can be fired from any 12-gauge shotgun. It contains a small high-voltage battery. Its range is currently, but the U.S. Department of Defense, which funded development for the technology, expected delivery of a range projectile of this type from the company in 2007.
An XREP projectile was controversially used by British police during the 2010 Northumbria Police manhunt. It subsequently transpired that the XREP has never been officially approved for use in the United Kingdom and the weapon system was provided unrequested to the police at the scene directly by the civilian company which distributes TASER International's products in the UK. The company's license to provide TASER systems was afterwards revoked by the Home Secretary Theresa May.

Prototype designs

Due to increased interest in developing less-lethal weapons, mainly from the U.S. Military, a number of new types of electroshock weapon are being researched. They are designed to provide a "ranged" less-lethal weapon.
The electrolaser is a prototype weapon that uses a laser to create a conducting ionized channel through the air.
A shockround is a piezo-electric projectile that generates and releases electric charge on impact.

Weapons that administer electric shock through a stream of fluid

Prototype electroshock guns exist that replace the solid wire with a stream of conductive liquid, which offers the range of a TASER CEW and the possibility of multiple shots. According to the proponents of this technology, difficulties associated with this experimental design include:
Another design, announced by Rheinmetall W&M as a prototype in 2003, uses an aerosol as the conductive medium. The manufacturers called it a "Plasma Taser"; however, this is only a marketing name, and the weapon does not use plasma. According to the proponents of this technology, problems associated with this design include:
Since 2001, Russian developer Oleg Nemtyshkin has sought to create a repeating stun pistol, after the Axon TASER CEW. This weapon, the first of its kind, uses tensioned, uninsulated wire and is capable of cycling multiple shots with the pull of a trigger. A video of the S5 pistol firing at targets was uploaded on YouTube.

Controversies

Because of the use of electricity and the claim of the weapon being non-lethal, controversy has sprouted over particular incidents involving the weapon and the use of the weapon in general. In essence, controversy has been centered on the justification of the use of the weapon in certain instances, and, in some cases, health issues that are claimed to be due to the use of the weapon.
Tests conducted by the Cleveland Clinic found that TASER CEWs did not interfere with pacemakers and implantable defibrillators. A study conducted by emergency medicine physicians at the University of California, San Diego Medical Center showed no lasting effects of the TASER device on healthy test subjects. However, TASER International no longer claims the devices are "non-lethal", instead saying they "are more effective and safer than other use-of-force options".
Currently, TASER devices are programmed to be activated in automatic five second bursts, although the officer can stop the energy charge at any time by engaging the safety switch. The charge can also be prolonged beyond five seconds if the trigger is held down continuously. The operator can also inflict repeated shock cycles with each pull of the trigger as long as both barbs remain attached to the subject. The only technical limit to the number or length of the electrical cycles is the life of the battery, which can be ten minutes or more.
Concerns about the use of conducted electrical weapons have arisen from cases that include the death of the Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski in the Vancouver, BC airport where he died after the RCMP officer, in spite of his training, repeatedly stunned him with a TASER CEW. The report by forensic pathologist Charles Lee, of Vancouver General Hospital, listed the principal cause of death as "sudden death during restraint", with a contributory factor of "chronic alcoholism".
A similar incident occurred in Sydney, Australia, to Roberto Laudisio Curti, a 21-year-old tourist from Brazil. He died after repeated exposure to a TASER device even after being physically apprehended. The Coroner was scathing of the "thuggish" behavior of the police. The repeated use of several TASER devices was considered excessive and unnecessary.
The study done by Pierre Savard, Ing., PhD., Ecole Polythechnique de Montréal, et al., for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, indicated that the threshold of energy needed to induce deadly ventricular fibrillation decreased dramatically with each successive burst of pulses; however, one pulse may provide enough energy to induce deadly ventricular fibrillation in some cases. The threshold for women may be less.
Although the TASER CEW is a programmable device, the controlling software does not limit the number of the bursts of pulses and the time between bursts while the trigger is held down continuously, or the number of times the shock cycles can be repeated.

Legal issues

Electroshock weapons have been made illegal in Germany by supplement 2 WaffG if they do not carry an official seal of approval demonstrating they do not constitute a health risk. As of July, 2011, no such seal has been issued to any device on the market. According to § 40 Abs. 4 WaffG, the German federal police may approve of exceptions. Such a special approval for purchase, ownership and carrying was in effect until 31 December 2010. As of 1 January 2011, only devices carrying the PTB's seal of approval are legal. Previous owners may keep their devices, but cannot carry or sell them. Electroshock weapons effective over a distance, like TASER CEWs, have been completely outlawed in Germany since 1 April 2008.
In the United Kingdom the possession and purchase of any weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing is prohibited. This includes electroshock weapons.

Torture

The United Nations Committee against Torture reports that the use of TASER devices can be a form of torture, due to the acute pain they cause, and warns against the possibility of death in some cases.
The use of stun belts has been condemned by Amnesty International as torture, not only for the physical pain the devices cause, but also for their heightened abuse potential, due to their perceived "harmlessness" in terms of causing initial injuries, like ordinary police batons do. Amnesty International has reported several alleged cases of excessive electroshock gun use that possibly amount to torture. They have also raised extensive concerns about the use of other electro-shock devices by American police and in American prisons, as they can be used to inflict cruel pain on individuals.
TASER CEWs may also not leave the telltale markings that a conventional beating might. The American Civil Liberties Union has also raised concerns about their use, as has the British human rights organization Resist Cardiac Arrest.

Legality

Argentina

In 2010, one court ruled against the use of five imported TASER devices by the Buenos Aires Metropolitan Police, to comply with a claim from the Human Rights Observatorium, that states that TASER CEWs are considered an instrument of torture by NGOs and the Committee against Torture of the UN.

Australia

Possession, ownership and use of a stun gun by civilians is considerably restricted, if not illegal in all States and Territories. The importation into Australia is restricted with permits being required.
Stun gun use in Australian law enforcement is as follows:
Austria allows police to use stun guns, including TASER CEWs. After using a TASER CEW, police must immediately call for an ambulance. The victim must be medically checked directly at the place of the shooting, and only a medically trained person may remove the darts. From 2006 to 2012, Austrian police used TASER CEWs 133 times—127 against humans and six against dogs. About 1,000 police officers were permitted in 2012 to carry and use a TASER CEW.

Brazil

Use of the TASER device is legal for the police. Its use is widespread mainly in the Guardas Municipais, who receive professional training in the use of electro-conductive pistols. TASER devices are also used by military police and specialized forces. There are laws allowing their use by private security companies, but such use is unusual because of the expense of maintaining a TASER CEW compared with an ordinary gun.

Canada

According to previous interpretation of the Firearms Act, TASER CEWs were considered "prohibited weapons" and could be used only by members of law-enforcement agencies after they were imported into the country under a special permit. The possession of restricted weapons must be licensed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canadian Firearms Program unless exempted by law. A 2008 review of the Firearms Act found that the act classifies "the TASER Public Defender and any variant or modified version of it" as "prohibited firearms". However, Canadian police forces typically treat TASER devices as "prohibited weapons", inconsistent with the restrictions on firearms.
The direct source for this information comes from an independent report produced by Compliance Strategy Group for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The report is called An Independent Review of the Adoption and Use of Conducted Energy Weapons by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In the report that is available through access to information, the authors argued that the CEW was, for several years after its adoption by the RCMP, erroneously characterized as a prohibited "weapon" under the Criminal Code, as opposed to a prohibited "firearm". This misunderstanding was subsequently incorporated into the RCMP's operational policies and procedures as well as those of other police services in Canada.
While the most recent RCMP operational manual, completed in 2007, correctly refers to the CEW as a prohibited firearm, a number of consequences of this error in classification remain to be dealt with, by both the RCMP and other Canadian police services. Consequently, it could be argued the police in Canada may not have had the proper authority under their provincial policing Acts and Regulation to use the CEW in the first place. The point of unauthorized use by the police was also raised by Dirk Ryneveld, British Columbia's Police Complaint Commissioner at the Braidwood inquiry on June 25, 2008. TASER device safety and issues have been extensively rehearsed and investigated after the Robert Dziekański TASER CEW incident at Vancouver International Airport.

Czech Republic

Electroshock weapons that require direct contact are not regulated by Czech law. They may be purchased, owned and carried for personal protection without any limitations and are a popular choice for self-defense alongside pepper sprays by people who don't have a license to carry a concealed firearm.
TASER CEWs are considered class A firearms under Czech law, i.e. same class as firearms that were not approved for civilian market. TASER devices that undergo approval process by the Czech Proof House for Firearms and Ammunition are considered class C firearms, i.e. their possession and carrying is subject to acquisition of firearms license.

Finland

In Finland possession of a TASER CEW is legal only for police officers. Police have been using TASER CEWs since 2005. Nowadays there is one in almost every patrol car.

France

TASER devices are used by the French National Police and Gendarmerie. In September 2008, they were made available to local police by a government decree, but in September 2009, the Council of State reversed the decision judging that the specificities of the weapon required a stricter regulation and control.
However, since the murder of a policewoman on duty, the TASER CEW has been in use again by local police forces since 2010.

Germany

The purchase, possession, and carrying of TASER devices in Germany has been prohibited since April 1, 2008. However TASER decices are in use by police SWAT teams, Spezialeinsatzkommando and others, in 13 out of 16 German states.

Greece

The Greek police uses TASER CEWs. Greek Police special forces used a TASER CEW to end the hijacking of a Turkish Airlines A310 by a Turkish citizen at Athens International Airport in March 2003.

Hong Kong

Under Hong Kong laws, Chapter 238 Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance, "Any portable device which is designed or adapted to stun or disable a person by means of an electric shock applied either with or without direct contact with that person" is considered an 'arm' and therefore, the importation, possession and exportation of TASER devices requires a license from the Hong Kong Police Force. They are otherwise illegal, and violation carries penalties up to a $100,000 fine and 14 years in jail.

Iceland

Use of TASER devices is generally prohibited in Iceland.

Ireland

Specialist units of Ireland's national police force use the X26 model; Special Detective Unit, Emergency Response Unit and Regional Support Unit. Issuing TASER CEWs to all members of the force is currently under consideration. Use of TASER CEWs in Ireland by private individuals is prohibited.

Israel

The Israeli police have approved using TASER devices. As of 16 February 2009, the first TASER CEWs became available to police units.
Israeli Defense Force first usage
TASER devices were first used by the Israeli Defense Force by the former special counter-terror unit Force 100 in 2004. The unit was disbanded in 2006. TASER CEWs are expected to re-enter operational use by the Israeli Defense Forces in the near future.
As of August 18, 2013, the use of TASER devices by Israeli police was temporarily suspended by Police Chief Yohanan Danino; after such instruments were used repeatedly and excessively by police against a person who allegedly was unarmed and who was not resisting a warranted arrest. But two weeks later the TASER CEW was unsuspended.

Kenya

Under Kenya's Firearms Act, a TASER device is considered a firearm, as per section 2 of the Act. The section offers one of the descriptions for a firearm as "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged or which can be adapted for the discharge of any shot, bullet or other missile and includes ... an electrical charge which when it strikes any person or animal is of sufficient strength to stun and temporarily disable the person or animal struck (such weapon being commonly known as a 'stun gun' or 'electronic paralyser' ".

Malaysia

Royal Malaysia Police are set to become the second in Southeast Asia police force after Singapore Police Force to use the less-lethal TASER X26 CEW. The TASER X26 CEW that Malaysian police bought comes with a holster and uses a non-rechargeable lithium battery able to deliver 195 cartridge shots. Policemen on rounds are issued four cartridges. The TASER devices were issued to policemen in Petaling Jaya, Dang Wangi in Kuala Lumpur and Johor Bahru.

New Zealand

A large-scale and generally well received trial by the New Zealand Police saw TASER devoces presented almost 800 times and fired over 100 times, but firing was "ineffective" about a third of the time. The TASER device had been "unintentionally discharged" more often than they had been used in the line of duty.
In October 2012, police said the TASER device had been "very successful in de-escalating dangerous and potentially life-threatening situations". Since their introduction, TASER CEWs had been presented 1320 times but only fired 212 times, resulting in 13 injuries. In July 2015, the Police Commissioner announced that TASER CEWs would be routinely carried by all police officers.

South Korea

Requires a permit to manufacture, distribute, purchase or carry an electroshock weapon. Any electroshock devices with a projectile are completely banned for civilian use.

Sweden

TASER devices and other electronic control devices are considered firearms in Sweden and are banned for civilian use. The Swedish police had purchased a limited quantity of TASER CEWs, and was about to initiate field trials when these were cancelled in 2005 after an ethics commission found that the need for such devices was not firmly established. The purchased TASER CEWs were then donated to Finland, where field trials were initiated. Since January 1st 2018, the Swedish police have been conducting tests with electroshock weapons for a two-year period and during the trial period approximately 700 police officers are trained. The move has been welcomed by the country's union for law enforcement.

United Kingdom

TASER CEWs are considered "prohibited weapons" under the Firearms Act 1968 and possession is an offence. The maximum sentence for possession is ten years in prison and an unlimited fine. There is a minimum sentence of 5 years imprisonment if the TASER device is disguised as another object such as a torch or a mobile phone.
TASER CEWs are now used by some British police as a "less lethal" weapon. It was also announced in July 2007, that the deployment of TASER devices by specially trained police units who are not firearms officers, but who are facing similar threats of violence, would be trialled in ten police forces. The 12-month trial commenced on 1 September 2007, and took place in the following forces: Avon & Somerset, Devon & Cornwall, Gwent, Lincolnshire, Merseyside, Metropolitan Police, Northamptonshire, Northumbria, North Wales and West Yorkshire.
Following the completion of the trial, the Home Secretary agreed on 24 November 2008 to allow chief police officers of all forces in England and Wales, from 1 December 2008, to extend TASER CEW use to specially trained units in accordance with current Association of Chief Police Officers policy and guidance, which states that TASER CEWs can be used only where officers would be facing violence or threats of violence of such severity that they would need to use force to protect the public, themselves, and/or the subject.
Also, in Scotland Strathclyde Police agreed in February 2010 to arm 30 specially trained police officers using the TASER X26 CEW. The pilot would last three months and would be deployed in Glasgow City Centre and Rutherglen.
A fund for up to 10,000 additional TASER devices is being made available for individual chief police officers to bid for TASER devices based on their own operational requirements.

United States

Court cases in recent years have addressed the legality of TASER CEW use by police officers. In Bryan v. MacPherson, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a TASER CEW had been used in a way that constituted excessive force and hence a violation of the Fourth Amendment. In the latter case Mattos v. Agarano, the same Court of Appeals found that in two situations involving TASER CEW use, one in drive-stun and one in dart mode, officers had used excessive force. According to an article in Police Chief magazine, this decision implies guidelines for the use of TASER CEWs and other Electronic Control Devices in gaining compliance, including that the officer must give warning before each application, and that the suspect must be capable of compliance, with enough time to consider a warning, and to recover from the extreme pain of any prior application of the TASER device; and that TASER devices must not be used on children, the elderly, and women who are visibly pregnant or inform the officer of their pregnancy.
According to TASER International, TASER devices are legal for civilian use in 34 states without restrictions, having various degrees of restriction in the remaining states. TASER CEWs are illegal for civilians to possess in the states of Hawaii and Rhode Island.
In 1991, an electroshock device supplied by Tasertron to the Los Angeles Police Department failed to subdue Rodney King—even after he was shocked twice with the device—causing officers to believe he was on PCP. Its lack of effectiveness was blamed on a possible battery problem.

Legality

TASER devices are considered the same as firearms by the United States government for the purposes of the Second Amendment protection, the right to keep and bear arms. They can be legally carried without a permit in almost every state. Their use in Connecticut, Illinois, and Wisconsin is legal with restrictions.
In March 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Caetano v. Massachusetts that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court erred in its rationale in upholding a law that prohibited the possession of stun guns. Though the decision didn't explicitly rule that stun gun bans are unconstitutional, it created doubt in laws forbidding their possession which led to many legal challenges and subsequent legalization of stun gun possession in previously prohibitive jurisdictions.
, Hawaii and Rhode Island retain bans on stun guns, in addition to some local jurisdictions.
Hawaii
Hawaii retains its bans on stun guns but more than one legal challenge pending.
Massachusetts
Previously, the U.S. Supreme Court had overruled the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in the Caetano case. However, when the case was remanded, the state dismissed the charges, thus allowing it to retain its ban on stun guns at the time. The law remained in force but was challenged in a separate lawsuit. On April 17, 2018, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in Ramirez v. Commonwealth, ruled that the state’s 2004 ban on stun guns is unconstitutional.
Michigan
In 2012, Michigan's ban on stun guns was ruled unconstitutional by the Michigan Court of Appeals.
New Jersey
On November 15, 2016, it was reported that New Jersey's Attorney General Christopher Porrino had conceded that the state's 1985 ban on stun guns is unconstitutional. On April 26, 2017 the lawsuit was settled by agreeing that the ban was unconstitutional and to promulgate regulations to allow for the possession of stun guns. The regulations allow for people over 18 to purchase stun guns, effective October 20, 2017.
New York
New York's ban on stun guns is being challenged by Matthew Avitabile. On March 22, 2019, the ban was ruled unconstitutional by the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.
Rhode Island
Rhode Island retains its ban on stun guns with no known legal challenges pending, but legislation was introduced in 2018 to repeal the ban.
Washington D.C.
On September 29, 2016, Washington D.C. announced that it intends on repealing its ban on stun guns in response to a lawsuit. The new law regulating stun guns for persons 18 years or older took effect on May 19, 2017. Metropolitan Police Department issued a statement about the legality of stun guns.
Virgin Islands
The United States Virgin Islands repealed its stun gun ban in 2016.
Wisconsin
In legalizing concealed carry of firearms in 2011, Wisconsin also legalized stun gun possession for people with a license.
Localities within states
Chicago
bans the sale of stun guns within its limits and imposes an application requirement followed by a 120-day waiting period for attempting to purchase a stun gun from outside the city. Illinois law requires licensure prior to possessing a stun gun in addition to several other restrictions. On March 21, 2019, the Supreme Court of Illinois ruled unanimously that the ban on possession or carriage of stun guns in public is facially unconstitutional. It ruled that a section of law which prohibits the carrying or transportation of stun guns is unconstitutional because an exception against the prohibition only covers handguns, thus there is no exception for stun guns, and therefore the ban is unconstitutional. This leaves stun gun carriage legal without a permit.
Delaware localities
, Newark, and Wilmington retain their bans on stun guns.
Iowa localities
and Denison city ban stun guns.
Maryland localities
lifted its ban on stun guns in 2013 and Harford County did so in 2014. Howard County, facing a lawsuit over its ban on stun guns, repealed its law on February 21, 2017; Annapolis voted to repeal its ban on February 27, 2017; Baltimore County repealed its local ordinance in April 2017; Baltimore city's ban, in response to a lawsuit, was repealed on May 15, 2017. Ocean City retains its ban but exempts persons with a concealed weapons permit from the ban.
New Orleans
' ban on stun guns was challenged in November 2016 and was eventually repealed on April 3, 2017.
Overland Park
, Kansas repealed its stun gun ban in 2014.
Philadelphia
repealed its 1977 stun gun ban in late October 2017.
Washington localities
repealed its ban on stun guns in 2016. Tacoma's ban was repealed on June 27, 2017. Ruston retains its ban.

Patents