(credit: J. Sibiga Photography)

The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the rationale behind a Massachusetts law barring stun guns. In an unsigned order, the eight-member court ruled that the Second Amendment and the high court’s precedent on the topic were enough to question the legal reasoning behind the top court of Massachusetts backing the prosecution of a woman that they said unlawfully possessed the electric weapon for self-defense.

The decision, for the moment, sets aside last year’s ruling from the Judicial Court of Massachusetts, which upheld the law that carries up to 2.5 years in prison. The state’s top court had ruled that the US Constitution’s framers never envisioned the modern stun-gun device, first patented in 1972. The state court also said that stun guns are not suitable for military use and that it did not matter that state lawmakers had approved the possession of handguns outside the home.

For the moment, the US Supreme Court didn’t go so far as to throw out the Massachusetts stun gun law. Nor did the court outright say stun guns are “arms” for Second Amendment purposes. But the decision is a major threat to the five states and the District of Columbia that ban them outright for civilians, and it comes at a time when all types of weapons are being constructed at home via 3D printing technology.