So is Claire Wolfe really a pot head?

http://www.clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00002218.html

I saw this posted on another site. Is there any truth to this? Or is this some lie, that someone put up there as a smear campaign?

That's her Blog, so I imagine it's true.
To each his own, I guess.
Rich

Thanks for the reply.

Kinda figured she was on drugs. So she's the "token doper".

Keep up the good work on the mag.

"devout coward"-duly noted and agreed. Just another narcissistic fuctard with a blog.

I'm all out of GIVE A FUCK what people do to themselves.

There are many people that are fucked up...and they didn't smoke any ganja.


WHY should we care if she smokes dope?

Originally Posted By treelander: I'm all out of GIVE A FUCK what people do to themselves. There are many people that are fucked up...and they didn't smoke any ganja. WHY should we care if she smokes dope?

Ethics?

I've had people I know killed because of the demand for her precious "herb". She is paid to write for a magazine that caters toward the LE/Armed citizen market.

I don't care what she does, but announcing it to the world is throwing it in everyones face.

I've had people I know killed because of the demand for her precious "herb"

And I've had people I know killed because of the demand for their car. What's your point, unless you're intimating that Claire Wolfe is a murderess?

SWAT is hardly her full time employer and she hardly owes us a vow of silence as to her beliefs. What she smokes is, quite honestly, of very little concern to me unless she starts crusading for tougher drug laws or imposes her preferences on me. She's hasn't.

Claire's a consistent libertarian. What I find interesting in the difference between Pot Smokers and Pot Abstainers is this:
Pot Smokers couldn't care less whether you smoke Pot or not.

The same holds true for alcohol, seat belt use, cigarette smokers and, yes, even firearms ownership. The overwhelming majority of people who care whether you own guns or not, are generally those who don't own them themselves. They just want to protect others from your way of life, much as you wish to protect others from Claire's. And the only thing that separates use of marijuana and use of firearms is a single [future] law, passed by those who are overly concerned that YOU own and use firearms, while they don't. Think about it.
Rich

Hey Rich, I just want to say that as a current SWAT subscriber, I look forward to her articles. She's part of what makes your magazine so worth reading. Without her awesome contributions, it'd be that much closer to "just another gun rag".

-Mr Wilson

edited out my pissin in the wind...

You're right doc, referring to people as "Just another narcissistic fuctard with a blog" is exactly what I want people wearing a badge to think about gun owners in 20 years...

ETA: I removed my comment because I thought better of it, but I stand by my opinion that he's not the kind of person I'd want policing my town. I see him as part of the problem with prohibition-The kind of person who thinks that things are better as they are and anyone not content is obviously a narcissistic fuctard. And while that's fine to have as a personal opinion, I don't like people like that having badges.

I really don't give a rats ass what intoxicant people choose to use .
As long as they use them with some personal responsibility .
In my book Alcohol is the same as weed . Both of which I've tried
and both of which I have no use for .

I typically don't even bother to respond to posts like this , but this site
in particular seems to have a more of a double standard then other sites
I visit .

A week doesn't go by where someone doesn't post a " What Are You Drinking "
thread and a " Evils Of Dope " thread .

I've read her articles. Some things I agree with, others I do not. The "keep your laws off my body, cuz I'm not hurtin' anybody" crowd forget that sometimes, they are hurting people, albeit not directly. Officers are shot and killed every year because someone hauling a load of dope doesn't want to get caught. Furthermore, some of these people are only one side-step away from being a member of an anti-government militia, ready to blow up a government building.

In the end, last time I checked, possession of weed was illegal. Furthermore, under Federal Law, being a user of illegal drugs is a prohibitor to firearms possession. Agree or disagree, like it or not, that's the law.

As far as her articles go, it is ironic that an apparent self-professed drug user is writing in a magazine geared toward LE and law abiding gun owners interested in self-defense. I only hope I never have to read an article about her ranting that the po-po kicked in her door, took her weed and all her guns...and then she claimes she was "targeted" because she writes articles challenging police and government authority.

Were officers not shot & killed during the twenties chasing shipments of whiskey from Canada? Not that that makes it okay but last time I checked people aren't shooting guns out the back of the Budweiser Clydesdale Wagon. And my (limited) understanding is that the majority of those running drugs are illegals who's only fear is being deported (again) so that they may try again, what link do you have between drug runners & Anti-Government Militias?

And If i'm not mistaken, being addicted to illegal drugs prohibits the purchase of firearms, not ownership. Unless of course you think that by being a peaceable user of some plant at home ought to merit the SWAT team coming to remove you of the contents of your safe.

ETA: "That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."

Samuel, beer swilling, Adams

Originally Posted By MisterWilson: And If i'm not mistaken, being addicted to illegal drugs prohibits the purchase of firearms, not ownership. Unless of course you think that by being a peaceable user of some plant at home ought to merit the SWAT team coming to remove you of the contents of your safe.

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
(2) who is a fugitive from justice;
(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;
(5) who, being an alien—
(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26)));
(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;
(8) who is subject to a court order that—
(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate;
(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and
(C)
(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or
(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or
(9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

Originally Posted By Rich_Lucibella: I've had people I know killed because of the demand for her precious "herb" And I've had people I know killed because of the demand for their car. What's your point, unless you're intimating that Claire Wolfe is a murderess? SWAT is hardly her full time employer and she hardly owes us a vow of silence as to her beliefs. What she smokes is, quite honestly, of very little concern to me unless she starts crusading for tougher drug laws or imposes her preferences on me. She's hasn't. Claire's a consistent libertarian. What I find interesting in the difference between Pot Smokers and Pot Abstainers is this: Pot Smokers couldn't care less whether you smoke Pot or not. The same holds true for alcohol, seat belt use, cigarette smokers and, yes, even firearms ownership. The overwhelming majority of people who care whether you own guns or not, are generally those who don't own them themselves. They just want to protect others from your way of life, much as you wish to protect others from Claire's. And the only thing that separates use of marijuana and use of firearms is a single [future] law, passed by those who are overly concerned that YOU own and use firearms, while they don't. Think about it. Rich

Great post. Couldn't have said it better.

Too bad people just can't just go through life without the need to impose their beliefs on others.

Whoops, you got me K9, maybe it's just the form you fill out to purchase a new gun that reads "addicted to" instead of "unlawful user". Then again maybe not.

Originally Posted By AZ-K9: Originally Posted By treelander: I'm all out of GIVE A FUCK what people do to themselves. There are many people that are fucked up...and they didn't smoke any ganja. WHY should we care if she smokes dope? Ethics?

So when HR 1022 or something worse eventually passes will ownership of anything the AG decides is not up to Zumbos sporting standards be unethical?
After all, it will be against the law to have them then. Just like the drug laws now.

Originally Posted By AZ-K9: Originally Posted By treelander: I'm all out of GIVE A FUCK what people do to themselves. There are many people that are fucked up...and they didn't smoke any ganja. WHY should we care if she smokes dope? Ethics? I've had people I know killed because of the demand for her precious "herb". She is paid to write for a magazine that caters toward the LE/Armed citizen market. I don't care what she does, but announcing it to the world is throwing it in everyones face.

I'll be sure and give the opinion on "ethics" of an oath-betraying LEO who cites and willingly enforces overtly unconstitutional and immoral anti-gun statutes all the consideration it merits. AZ-K9 would have made a swell cop in Nazi Germany circa 1938. Good luck in ever comprehending the phrases "unalienable individual right" and "shall not be infringed."

How many wannabe cops admit to a history of drug use during their selection process ("admit" because they're hooked up to a polygraph machine)? The same folks who are hired, issued guns and badges, then spend a career arresting other people for engaging in identical behavior as they did. More of that "ethics" stuff.

Unlike many LEOs, politicians, judges, and prosecutors, I don't drink alcohol and have never used any illicit drug. Not because of any asinine law but because such behavior is irrational. Claire Wolfe smoking pot bothers me not a whit. LEOs who place their jobs and pensions ahead of their oaths to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and who routinely abrogate individual liberties (while rationalizing their misdeeds) are a different matter.

Godwin's Law:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one"

At that point, civility generally ends.
Rich

Meets the Godwin Standard

Copyright © 1996 - 2013 :: AR15.Com LLC :: All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.