By OBBM Network Editorial Staff

Derived from an episode of Armed Attorneys.

Imagine reaching for a device you trust to stop a violent encounter without killing anyone, only to discover the law now calls it a gun. That is the reality Texas gun owners face as prosecutors push to reclassify tasers as firearms, a shift that could dramatically narrow the scope of lawful self‑defense.

Legal Foundations: How Texas Defines a Firearm

The debate centers on Texas Penal Code §46.01, which defines a firearm as “any device designed, made, or adapted to expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an explosion or burning substance.” The hosts point out that the Axon Taser 10 fires darts propelled by compressed gas, a mechanism that technically fits the statutory language. As Richard D. Hayes explains, “It is using energy produced by burning substance. It is expelling projectiles from a barrel. Technically, that’s all you need.”

However, the same code distinguishes between “deadly weapons” and “per se deadly weapons.” A firearm is automatically classified as deadly, whereas a taser is generally considered non‑deadly unless it causes serious injury or death. This distinction matters because Texas law permits the use of non‑deadly force in self‑defense when responding to unlawful force, but deadly force—such as a firearm—requires the defender to be facing a deadly threat.

Why Prosecutors Want Tasers Treated as Guns

Emily Taylor argues the Harris County District Attorney’s office is motivated by more than legal nuance. She describes the office as “malicious dummies” seeking to “put you in a cage for the rest of your life.” The underlying goal, she suggests, is to expand the range of offenses that can be charged, including felon‑in‑possession statutes that apply to firearms but not to stun guns.

By labeling a taser a firearm, prosecutors could pursue felony charges against individuals who legally possess a non‑deadly weapon, effectively criminalizing a tool that many self‑defenders rely on to avoid lethal outcomes.

Legislative Attempts and Ongoing Battles

The hosts note that Texas lawmakers considered a bill in the 2025 session to clarify the distinction, but the proposal was “mucked up in committee substitute.” They testified in favor of the bill on behalf of Gun Owners of America, emphasizing that the law should preserve the two‑tiered system of force—non‑deadly versus deadly—found in Chapter 9, §9.55, which explicitly treats a police officer’s use of a stun gun as a use of force, not deadly force.

Despite these efforts, the issue remains unresolved. If the legislature does not act, the dispute will likely ascend to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, where divergent interpretations could lead to inconsistent rulings—potentially criminalizing ordinary citizens while allowing police officers to continue using tasers without the same liability.

Practical Implications for Texas Residents

For the average Texan, the stakes are personal. A self‑defender who employs a Taser 10 in a confrontation could face felony charges if a court adopts the prosecutor’s broader definition of firearm. Conversely, a police officer using the same device would likely be shielded by the statutory language that treats it as a non‑deadly use of force.

Richard D. Hayes warns that “the fact that Harris County is asking is a bad sign. They’re not asking for their own edification as an interesting legal concept. They’re asking so they can put people behind bars.” This asymmetry underscores a growing concern that legal definitions are being weaponized to restrict constitutional self‑defense rights.

Looking Ahead: What Texans Can Do

While the legal battle continues, the Armed Attorneys encourage listeners to stay informed and consider joining their Self‑Defense Legal Protection Plan, which offers direct access to attorneys for questions about weapon classifications and defensive use of force. By understanding the nuances of Texas law, citizens can better navigate the evolving legal landscape and protect their right to defend themselves with the least amount of force necessary.

Ultimately, the controversy over tasers reflects a broader tension between public safety initiatives and the preservation of Second Amendment freedoms. As Texas grapples with how to define modern weapons, the outcome will shape not only courtroom strategies but also the everyday security of its residents.

The full episode of Armed Attorneys is available on OBBM Network TV.