In Massachusetts, it is illegal to sell a “zoobow.” Mass. Gen. Laws Ann ch. 269, § 12. It is also illegal to sell a manrikigusari, nunchaku, shuriken, or klackers (the children’s toy popular in the early 1970s). The Massachusetts law does appear to have prevented the klackers violent crime epidemic which now plagues the other 49 states.
The minimum sentence for selling any of the above weapons in Massachusetts is two and half years in prison. So I want to be careful that when I am in Massachusetts, I do not violate this law by selling a zoobow. However, “zoobow” does not appear in The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, and I have been unable to find a definition on the web.
Accordingly, I would be grateful if a commenter could explain what a zoobow is.
Chris Travers says:
I thought a zoobow was the same thing as nunchaku, but I could be wrong.
Edit: Looking at the statute again, it looks like they mention nunchaku and zoobows in the same set, suggesting any weapon made by fastening two sticks together with wire, rope, etc. would be banned.
May 20, 2010, 6:06 pmPeteP says:
The full name is actually a GA-zoobow. It’s a small structure you put in yuor back yard …
May 20, 2010, 6:09 pmChris Travers says:
I want to know if hurlbats are banned. (It’s not clear to me from reading the statute one way or the other, but it seems likely.)
On second thought, I don’t think a hurlbat is similar to a shurikan.
May 20, 2010, 6:09 pmFred 2 says:
According to google “zoobow, also known as klackers or kung fu sticks.” So I guess they are those connected sticks you see in kung fu movies. After all, the web is never wrong.
May 20, 2010, 6:14 pmChris Travers says:
Also, is it just me or do the framers of that statute clearly have no idea what a real shuriken is?
Most of the shurikens I have trained with do not fit the description of the statute but are either small throwing spikes or small throwing knives.
May 20, 2010, 6:15 pmAnonsters says:
What’s more, the statute actually says:
It reads to me like “zoobow” was just another name they gave for “klackers” or “kung fu sticks.”
May 20, 2010, 6:16 pmJoseph S says:
I found this case: Commonwealth v. Perry.
“The statute identifies a number of specific weapons that are prohibited. In some instances, the name of the weapon is followed by language describing weapons similar to the identified weapon. Thus, for example, the statute identifies several specific types of knives, but then also refers to “any [other] knife” having certain characteristics. Similarly, the statute refers to “knuckles of any substance” that can be “put to the same use with the same or similar effect” as metallic knuckles; nunchaku, zoobow “or any similar weapon” configured with two sticks connected by rope, chain, or wire; and shuriken or “any similar pointed starlike object intended to injure a person when thrown.” G. L. c. 269, § 10 (b).” (emphasis mine)
The use of semicolons would suggest that a zoobow is a form of or alternative name for nunchaku.
May 20, 2010, 6:18 pmRPT says:
If this was Kentucky, Rand Paul would vote to make it legal to carry them into his restaurant.
May 20, 2010, 6:18 pmDavid Schwartz says:
Chris Travers: If you mean this quote:
It’s almost equally consistent with a zoobow being another word for a shuriken. There is no plausible way to read the “two sticks” part as attaching “nunchaku” to “zoobow” (making them both weapons that consist of two sticks) that doesn’t similarly attach it to “metallic knuckles”, which can’t be right since they don’t consist of two sticks.
I have found no evidence that anyone knows.
May 20, 2010, 6:20 pmwm13 says:
Unless the proprietor prohibits members of your racial group from coming into the restaurant in the first place.
May 20, 2010, 6:21 pmAnonsters says:
wm13, FTW.
May 20, 2010, 6:22 pmJoseph S says:
In Commonwealth v. Perry, which I found somewhere online without a citatition, it says:
“The statute identifies a number of specific weapons that are prohibited. In some instances, the name of the weapon is followed by language describing weapons similar to the identified weapon. Thus, for example, the statute identifies several specific types of knives, but then also refers to “any [other] knife” having certain characteristics. Similarly, the statute refers to “knuckles of any substance” that can be “put to the same use with the same or similar effect” as metallic knuckles; nunchaku, zoobow “or any similar weapon” configured with two sticks connected by rope, chain, or wire; and shuriken or “any similar pointed starlike object intended to injure a person when thrown.” G. L. c. 269, § 10 (b).” (emphasis mine)
The semicolon use suggests that it is (or is very similar to) nunchaku.
May 20, 2010, 6:23 pmmatt d says:
David Schwartz:
I think it reads most naturally if you replace the comma after “knuckles: and the comma before “a shuriken” with semicolons.
“Most naturally”, of course, isn’t naturally at all. It’s awkward no matter what they meant.
May 20, 2010, 6:25 pmAnderson says:
A zoobow is a mental-energy weapon that, when used against libertarian-leaning bloggers, causes them to suddenly shut up about Rand Paul the day after he’s reported to disagree with the justice of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Frighteningly effective thus far, it seems.
May 20, 2010, 6:27 pmChris Travers says:
Also, I wonder if the statute bans the sale of baseball bats (as bludgeons)…..
May 20, 2010, 6:29 pmPhelps says:
I’m getting that it’s an idiot trying to transliterate tetsubo from just hearing it in passing from a half-literate gangbanger.
[DK: That seem to be an excellent guess.]
May 20, 2010, 6:31 pmJoseph S says:
How about this?
Wikipedia‘s article about the Chinese 2-section staff says that it is called Chang Xiou Ban. Could Xiou Ban be mispronounced as Zoobow? I don’t know how to pronounce Chinese, but I would pronounce the last two words as something like “Zoo Ban”, which could foreseeable have lost the ‘n’ and been called “zoobow”
May 20, 2010, 6:34 pmAnthony says:
Possible, but equally possible that they just didn’t care what a ‘real’ shuriken is. Most likely, they were interested in the stuff that was being sold as shuriken (which would likely be the star-shaped things, probably of stamped metal or something equally cheap).
May 20, 2010, 6:35 pmAlanDownunder says:
Whatever happened to the right to bear arms? Don’t them furrin kinda arms count?
May 20, 2010, 6:39 pmAnonsters says:
This is from Criminal Model Jury Instructions for Use in the District Court (Volume II) Instruction 7.680 (MJII MA-CLE 7.680), published by Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education, Inc.:
It then sets out a list of items, like:
Further down on the list:
May 20, 2010, 6:40 pmAnderson says:
Phelps is surely correct — same way we got “numchuks.”
May 20, 2010, 6:47 pmAnonsters says:
What happened immediately after the 1975 amendment adding zoobows to the list of prohibited weapons was signed into law?
From (PDF warning): http://archives.lib.state.ma.us/actsResolves/1975/1975acts0585.pdf
May 20, 2010, 6:49 pmChris Travers says:
269-10 is also an interesting section which mentions the zoobow, etc. again and also includes all two-edged knives, etc.
However, do I read this statute correctly to criminalize placing a bar of soap in a cotton sock (that might qualify as a blackjack), and that carrying this about oneself or on one’s person might be a felony?
Remind me to avoid travelling to Massachusetts.
May 20, 2010, 6:50 pmCrunchy Frog says:
But would the Mass law ban the hidden blades of Altair?
May 20, 2010, 7:13 pmLarryA says:
I think it comes under the “I know one when I see one” rule.
Cop: “What are you doing with that zoobow?”
Suspect: “What zoobow. This is a slide rule.”
Cop: “Well, where I come from it’s a zoobow, and it’s illegal. Spread ‘em.”
May 20, 2010, 8:19 pmjellis58 says:
I think Phelps nailed it.
May 20, 2010, 8:23 pmDoc Merlin says:
It is fairly common to confuse shakien with shurkien.
May 20, 2010, 8:30 pmGuy says:
Maybe Massachusetts was in the midst of a ninja invasion. We just didn’t hear about it because they were ninjas.
May 20, 2010, 8:37 pmChris Travers says:
I’m far more worried about blackjacks and bludgeons being subject to the “I know one when I see one” rule because I can imagine things like carrying a baseball bat, or carrying items using a sock as a bag suddenly becoming a felony in the eyes of an officer.
May 20, 2010, 8:40 pmGuy says:
What I find interesting is that the law seems to ban actual human knuckles, I guess you could argue that they can’t be “put to the same use” as metallic knuckles, since iron knuckles are placed over your actual knuckles, and actual knuckles aren’t placed over anything. Otherwise it seems the only things preventing this interpretation would be either a lack of mens rea or the fact that it would be absurd.
May 20, 2010, 8:47 pmPersonFromPorlock says:
Interestingly,
perfectly describes a jump rope.
May 20, 2010, 9:06 pmAnonsters says:
You conveniently left out the first part:
A jump rope is not a weapon.
Yes, yes, I know, you could use a jump rope to strangle someone, or maybe to whip someone, etc. But the law is a prohibition on manufacture or sale of the enumerated items, not their use as weapons.
May 20, 2010, 9:17 pmDG says:
ZooBow is my wife’s pet name for my…ah…well, it might be considered a deadly weapon.
So much for visiting Boston…
May 20, 2010, 9:19 pmMichelle Dulak Thomson says:
Anonsters,
Yes, yes, I know, you could use a jump rope to strangle someone, or maybe to whip someone, etc. But the law is a prohibition on manufacture or sale of the enumerated items, not their use as weapons.
Are you saying that all’s OK, it’s not illegal to have a jump rope, only to make or sell one?
May 20, 2010, 9:27 pmgecko says:
Its the thing that goes up…
May 20, 2010, 9:53 pmmack says:
Zoobow is just another name for a nunchaku- courtesy of THR (The High Road).
Just more “reasonable” weapons control law – makes just as much sense as the states gun control laws.
May 20, 2010, 9:56 pmAnonsters says:
No, I was anticipating a response to my statement that a jump rope is not a weapon. The anticipated response was: But you can use a jump rope as a weapon. I was saying that that is not an adequate response (and thus fails) in light of what this specific law is about and what it specifically provides. Yes, you can use a jump rope as a weapon. But that’s not what this law is about, so it’s wrong to describe this law as sweeping jump ropes within its scope.
May 20, 2010, 10:11 pmDennis Nicholls says:
It would be difficult to legally distinguish a jump rope from a garotte….
California bans a flechette, whatever the heck that is. It would appear difficult to legally distinguish a flechetter from barroom darts used for the sport of darts.
May 20, 2010, 10:54 pmSkyler says:
My parents bought us klackers when they first came out. Those things were dangerous! And then they had a nasty tendency to shatter. They were an even stupider toy than lawn darts. At least lawn darts were fun to play with.
May 20, 2010, 11:35 pmChris Travers says:
Wedding rings would be clearly banned by the law by my reading…. Solitaire diamond engagement rings even moreso…..
Keep in mind I did some improvised-weapons study when practising Kempo…..
May 21, 2010, 12:05 amMalvolio says:
Wouldn’t it be easier just to outlaw bashing a dude upside the head, instead of running around trying to outlaw all the things that a dude could hypothetically use to bash some other dude upside the head with?
If a “zeebow” really does mean a tetsubo — and not, as I first thought, a zebu — that would mean the good people of Massachusetts have illegalized a fictional weapon, legendarily wielded by trolls. What’s next, special sales tax on the Holy Grail? An ordinance forbidding unicorns within city limits?
May 21, 2010, 3:54 amMatthew Carberry says:
Why would they regulate zebu but not the far more dangerous “assault buffalo” m’bogo?
May 21, 2010, 5:10 amPubliusFL says:
I think they’re used to hunt bandersnatches, heffalumps, and vermicious knids.
May 21, 2010, 6:18 amBC says:
An “xi” in a Mandarin Chinese word would sound much like the English word “she”.
May 21, 2010, 7:05 amMike C. says:
Off topic, but two things I always want to see on the spec sheet of any firearm I buy…
CA Aprroved ? NO
May 21, 2010, 7:36 amMA Approved ? NO
PersonFromPorlock says:
It’s a weapon if the DA wants to call it one and the court agrees, just like taking a video of a police stop is an illegal wiretap.
May 21, 2010, 8:26 amkrs says:
Once they ban all of the ninja weapons, will they move on to banning sharks with lasers?
Or the famous velociraptor with a jetpack and scissors?
May 21, 2010, 9:05 amSandy MacHoots says:
No, he’d let individual restaurant owners decide whether they wanted to ban them in their restaurant, just as Texas (I believe) does with handguns.
May 21, 2010, 9:24 amHouston Lawyer says:
I remember Klackers. They were damn annoying but I thought the only danger from them was their tendency to explode.
In Texas, if you want to deny entry to concealed weapons, you must post a sign at the entrance of the facility citing Section 30.06 of the Code. Any other signs are ineffective. The thirty aught six code is easy to remember.
In addition, if you have a 51% sign at the entrance, that means you get more than 50% of your revenues from the sale of alcohol, meaning that it is illegal to bring a concealed firearm within the premises.
May 21, 2010, 10:05 amSparky says:
This is a zoobow:
http://absoluteagency.com/absolute_personals/zoobow.html
May 21, 2010, 11:02 amChris Travers says:
(I’m also known to arrange keys on long chains of key rings such that I can hold the key ring and have keys stick out between each of my fingers in a variety of fist shapes. I do so explicitly because I can use the keys as weapons. I’ve never had problems bringing keys through airport security though but I wonder if such a device is banned under this Massachusetts law.)
May 21, 2010, 11:05 amOld Easterner says:
Massachusetts gun/weapon laws were written by idiots and morons. The first rule to apply when trying understand them is that there is NO logic or consistency to any of them. To try to make sense of them will cause blood to run out of your ears.
But, I exaggerate. Keep in mind, only, that every sentence in the law was added to harass an inhibit any ability for self-defense. The very confusion in the law contributes to that policy.
Example:
When the law mentions “firarms” it only means handugns. Except in the case of the “Firearms Identification Card”. That only permits ownership of long guns.
And remember the words of our AG, Martha Coakley (who who did not become US Senator), speaking, iirc, of a shopkeeper who thwarted a robbery: “We…we really try and discourage people from self help.”
May 21, 2010, 11:13 amsardonic_sob says:
I worked my way through college and law school selling knives (and scissors, and other things) in a now-defunct chain of cutlery stores. As I was usually the sole male working in the store, I got questions about weaponry by default, and so I made it my business to find out what I could about such things.
Short answer: many people have little or no idea how often they do things that, technically, constitute a fairly serious crime involving concealed or unlawful weapons. For instance, most “anti-switchblade” laws are written in such a way that many common pocketknives and utility knives, in the hands of someone who understands how they work, are unlawful to carry. Another very common example was “butterfly” knives (knives whose handles independently hinge to reveal the blade when manipulated.) For reasons known only to the God of Hoplophobia, the legislature in at least one state, at the time I was selling them, statutorily defined butterfly knives as concealed weapons. Even if you were walking down the street holding it in your open hand (with the blade in a closed position) for all to see, you were committing the offense of carrying a concealed weapon.
May 21, 2010, 11:16 amsardonic_sob says:
No, but my understanding is that the second you did that in England, your keys would become an unlawful offensive weapon. There are levels. :/
May 21, 2010, 11:20 amCareless says:
Father who was charged with assault and battery for punching a man groping his 4 year old son. She also said “We can’t have people taking the law into their own hands. The father should have waited for the police.”
May 21, 2010, 12:00 pmChris Travers says:
Also, wouldn’t that violate the establishment and free exercise clauses?
Does this mean I can’t conjure trolls to help women with childbirth in the state of Massachusetts? (There are reasons to believe that charms involved in summoning trolls were used by the Norse for this purpose but that’s a long philology paper.)
May 21, 2010, 12:14 pmys says:
Those ninjas were apprehended in western Mass 10 years later and turned out to be mutant turtles.
May 21, 2010, 12:39 pmray_g says:
Imagine a nail, with fins similar to the common bar room dart. They come in various sizes. It has been a while but I recall that the ones I have seen and handled range from about the size of a 4 penny nail down to that of a finishing nail. Originally developed for anti-personnel bombs and mines. The smaller ones can be loaded into shotgun shells, the CA law is addressing that.
May 21, 2010, 1:07 pmBama 1L says:
Zoobow is a perfectly cromulent word.
May 21, 2010, 1:17 pmCareless says:
On the subject of ninja violence, Rescue by ninjas
May 21, 2010, 1:44 pmChris Travers says:
That’s exactly what Massachusetts is trying to prevent ;-)
May 21, 2010, 2:48 pmTexas Lawyer in DFW says:
Makes sense to me, really.
The issue is that there was a time when you could carry all the kobudo weapons about and they were perfectly legal. Then some things got changed. I still remember doing a sword kata in a talent show and thereafter encountering the police. I got the sword back (with lots and lots and lots of fingerprints). The poor guys with the various wooden martial arts weapons got them permanently confiscated.
In addition, people often try to work loopholes. So, rather than the round resin balls that were sold as klackers (and which made excellent bolos in the large size), people made “klackers” out of sticks and string that sure looked like something else. Statutes like this are intended to keep you from putting sticks on a string as a weapon and then calling them something else.
Fun stuff though.
May 21, 2010, 4:12 pmChris Travers says:
But that doesn’t address dual-use weapons. The problem is that these are aimed at martial arts “weapons” while the fact is that, to a real martial artists, anything can be a weapon. So while the law here bans bludgeons, it doesn’t ban essentially identical baseball bats. There’s no real essential difference. Want a lighter but still very dangerous blunt weapon? Get a walking cane.
Let me put this bluntly: If the goal is to disarm martial artists, it’s not going to work. A bath towel can be a lethal weapon. (Well, technically most uses of a bath towel during a fight would be less than lethal, but given the right opening it could be used to strangle one’s opponent.)
May 21, 2010, 6:47 pmNorthern Dave says:
Had to read through to make sure Chris Travers hadn’t brought up the obvious point that this law doesn’t ban three-staff flails, only two staff flails :-)
Funny story about nice Police. Here in Ontario most weapons have been banned forever. Fellow I know recounted how when he was about 17 he was the victim of a theft and wishing to be law-abiding went to the local constabulary to report that someone had stolen his nunchaka and he wanted them recovered! Police gently informed irate young fellow that it was perfectly illegal to have them in the first place, so would he consider withdrawing his complaint? He was wise for his years and listened to his uniformed elders :-)
May 21, 2010, 9:26 pmNorthern Dave says:
Chris wrote:
“If the goal is to disarm martial artists, it’s not going to work”
I think the goal is to disarm idiots. You and I both know that any decently trained ex-military personnel can kill you with a glass of warm milk. Most trade in the fancy looking stuff is to young Nimrods who are dreaming of being a public nuisance
May 21, 2010, 9:29 pmBrad says:
The California anti-weapon laws are full of crazy and stupid prohibitions. I think a person could write a very funny and very shocking book on the subject if they had the time and sanity to spare for the project.
For example, did you know that any rocket with a diameter greater than 0.6 inches is a felony to possess in California? That stupid definition encompasses typical Estes type model rockets flown by hobbyists and children! And this example just scratches the surface how nutty the California laws are.
May 22, 2010, 3:54 ammack says:
“Most trade in the fancy looking stuff is to young Nimrods who are dreaming of being a public nuisance”
young nimrods who are dreaming of being a public nuisance – you mean proto-politicians who grow up to pass such stupid laws?
May 22, 2010, 11:28 amChris Travers says:
Why aren’t nimrods classified as dangerous weapons then? ;-)
May 22, 2010, 2:38 pmIan Argent says:
Nimrod carries a deadly weapon – being, you know, The Hunter. A bow, most likely.
May 22, 2010, 6:00 pmNorthern Dave says:
Well I have known a couple of fellows who are licensed as living weapons (one in Tokyo at that!) but that was on the serious registered-and-required-to-report/carry-certification end of the scale (and they all wear suits and look like the pleasant fellows they are. The most dangerous fellow I’ve ever known everyone called “Grandpa” as he was so mild-mannered)….
Don’t go giving the Mass. legislators any ideas or next they’ll be arresting folks on presumption of being potentially hazardous based on nimrodian appearance :-)
May 22, 2010, 10:08 pmNorthern Dave says:
Not in Mass. he doesn’t :-)
May 22, 2010, 10:09 pmIan Argent says:
Well, presumably he gets the hunting license and only carries it during bowhunting season at a location he’s permitted to hunt. After all, he’s The Hunter, not The Felon
May 23, 2010, 12:12 amTyrone Slothrop says:
Does anyone know if Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was in possession of a zoobow? That would explain a lot.
May 23, 2010, 1:25 amJNS says:
The statute bans the sale of human knuckles. Mere possession is tolerated.
EDIT: Apparently the statute bans carrying human knuckles on one’s person, which interpreted narrowly I strongly agree with.
May 23, 2010, 4:37 amtls says:
Houston Lawyer: Since you cite the”thirty aught six” and are a Texan, do you have an opinion on the 30.06 vs the .308 vs the 7.62 Nato and their interchangeability? Or do you believe that the neck length IS a critical consideration and the argument they’re-all-the-same fails?
May 24, 2010, 1:25 amGentlemanFromHanover says:
Yes sir – I heard Ms. Coakley say it live on Jim “the Red” and Marjory “the pink”‘s show.
May 28, 2010, 4:59 amGentlemanFromHanover says:
For those not lucky enough to be under the command of our glorious leaders on Beacon hill – Here are the answers to your questions:
YES – All ninja weapons are banned, due to a rash of ninja murders in “Wuh-stah” (Worcester)
YES – Our glorious leaders are NOT smarter than a fifth grader… In our Ionic city of Boston, Jason Varitek kicks field goals (which is impressive for a baseball catcher), our AG does try to discourage self-help and our Harvard professors cause police to “act stupidly”..
YES – They are serious.
YES – To challenge a traffic ticket, you have to pay a $25 court fee, if you win – you still pay the fee. A 2nd appeal fee is much higher.
The best way to understand it is, all weapons are banned, you are NOT allowed to defend yourself, you have to wait for a police officer to get off his detail job (mandated for all road work unless you pay a flagman from the governors cousins company more than the cop’s overtime) to come to the “rescue”, with the firefighters that only now have to pass a single drug test. We are living Reagans famous “everything that isn’t compulsory is prohibited” joke.
Yet, I got a ticket for a past due vehicle inspection and they didn’t have any record of it at the RMV and I had to give THEM the info in order to pay it. The same RMV won’t send you a notice when your license is about to expire because it’s too costly, but can do a bicycle/auto “same road, same rules” ad campaign and turn a profit.
In MA, they would ban all fictional weapons, just in case – though, in the words of our glorious Royal governor “cadillac” Deval Patrick, you may still cast a hex on people, because he said himself “Magic can happen here”…
A State rep held that job and Mayor of a major city concurrently, then got a multimillion dollar loan to balance the budget (after buying 10000 dollar drapes in NH)
Our EMT’s have been working with fake papers, but you can’t ask an illegal for ID, we pay 10x as much as NH per mile to maintain the roads which are full of potholes, Our state’s ethics test doesn’t let you answer incorrectly (or do a thing to stop multiple bribes of recent local fame from happening) Double dip pensions, massive fraud, and ever increasing fees after taxes, a tax on a tax for all alcohol, blue laws that prohibit booze from being sold in some towns on Sunday, but no nativity scene is tolerated in our tolerant “commonwealth”… which ‘commune’ outside of New England..
and finally,
May 28, 2010, 5:20 amYES – I’ll be moving to NH ASAP
GentlemanFromHanover says:
Not a problem, actually… and (don’t tell any state worker, so any MA resident that isn’t a masochist or illegal alien) we actually do have the castle doctrine here and can openly carry (with a $100/4yrs license)…
Remember, “Magic can happen here!” Together we can… conjure trolls, vampires and werewolves, but cannot buy silver bullets or sharpen sticks..
May 28, 2010, 5:35 amUnicorns are NOT forbidden, and in fact, it is a major felony charge to impede upon them or their habitat. Hunting unicorns gets you the wish-you-were-dying penalty (no death penalty, of course, nor restriction upon abortion) of listening to Mumbles Menino talk for several hours.
GentlemanFromHanover says:
YES – as well as Thor’s hammer, trans-fats and sensible thinking…
May 28, 2010, 5:38 amABroussard says:
I hope you enjoy your new found freedom in the Granite State, where open carry and 1500 round magazines are perfectly legal. So is body armor, “assault weapons” and many other “dangers to society”. Funny, we haven’t had terrible crimes like MA……….hmm
June 21, 2010, 10:51 amBarrett says:
Boston was the birthplace of freedom. Now it’s a den of limp-wristed, dissarmed ninnies. Imagine if this BS were in place before the revolution, hell we’d still be ruled by foreign banks… Oh yeah, I forgot, we are ruled by foreign banks.
Remember: when seconds count, the police will be there in minutes.
You have the right to die like a disarmed slave.
July 27, 2010, 5:30 pm