Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/8/2005 8:28:34 AM EDT
Let's forget the broader arguments about whether marijuana should be legal. We just had a poll on that. Instead, let's focus on the current situation, and assume the law as it is.

Let's suppose that someone has a serious illness and has gone to the time and trouble to get fully legally approved by their state to use, possess, and grow marijuana. That is, they are legal according to the state -- but not according to the Feds.

Form 4473 asks if someone is a user of illegal drugs. I know how the Feds would view this issue, but I am more interested in your personal opinion. Should approved medical users get an exemption (so to speak) from this question?

The problem is that some of these patients have become the victims of home invasions by people who are after their marijuana. I haven't done a scientific survey, but I seem to see more of these reports lately than any other kind of home invasion.

I would note that, if someone is taking prescribed drugs, including morphine, ritalin, and other addictive dangerous drugs then they would be allowed to purchase weapons. Should the same standard apply to medical marijuana users?

(And before you argue too much about whether marijuana is a medicine, just remember that the Federal Government already distributes it as a medicine.)
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:35:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 8:36:47 AM EDT by tactmaster]
I vote yes and hear is my main reason, just because someone is dependant on a drug, does not mean they are exempt from their constutional right to bear arms and to protect themselves. I just had a friend whos house got broken into from a neighbor, because he knew my buddys girlfriend was taking painkillers. (I guess she stupidly gave him some one day because he was an addict) so he decided to try and steal em one night. The end result was a pistol being held to his head until popo arrived. So more the reason to be allowed to own a weapon.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:15:37 AM EDT
If people want to list how they feel about the other issues of medical marijuana and marijuana legalization, that would be good, too. I am not really interested in starting those discussions over again in this thread. If you have some opinion on that, then so be it for the purposes of this poll.

I would, however, be interested to hear how your opinion on those subjects matches up with this one. For example, if you are opposed to either medical marijuana or marijuana legalization, does the Second Amendment still provide the right for people to defend their homes -- particularly if the state has approved their marijuana use? How do states' rights and the Second Amendment match up against the rather confused legal situation for marijuana?

Thanks.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:17:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 9:18:11 AM EDT by FortyFiveAutomatic]
I say why the fuck not?  If the state recognizes their sanctioned ability to smoke marijuana, then they are playing by the rules, so what's the problem?

Feds can go suck a dick.  This should be a state issue.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:20:03 AM EDT


Wolfie...seriously...there are more things to talk about than cannibus, dear.
Sex...Sex is a topic SURE to get you that cool animated flame thingie over the folder icon in NO TIME...
I'm just sayin'!

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:28:11 AM EDT
Of course they should be allowed to buy guns, same as people who take antidepressants are allowed to buy guns.  

Pot is basically the same as alcohol in its intoxicating effects, so if anyone answers no I hope they don't drink.

As for the law and order crowd, STFU.  When they ban my guns, guess what?  I'll not be turning mine in.

I swear, the only difference between the left and the right is the different inanimate objects they want to ban.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:33:29 AM EDT
Are you really asking if it is ok for someone engaging in legal activities as deemed by their state should also be allowed to legaly own firearms.  Really???
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:34:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:


Wolfie...seriously...there are more things to talk about than cannibus, dear.
Sex...Sex is a topic SURE to get you that cool animated flame thingie over the folder icon in NO TIME...
I'm just sayin'!




The issue is state's rights, conflicts of law, and the Second Amendment, dearie. See what I already said about the issues of marijuana itself. Not up for argument here.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:36:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Sader762:
Are you really asking if it is ok for someone engaging in legal activities as deemed by their state should also be allowed to legaly own firearms.  Really???



Yep. I figure that it ought to get different results from the other polls. I have my own opinion, but I am interested in others right now.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:37:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:40:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
Give it a rest, for pete's sake.



Different issue, for pete's sake.

How does the Second Amendment relate to states' rights?  If you want, assume that the drug in question is peanut butter. If peanut butter was legal at the state level, but not legal at the Fed level, should peanut butter users be denied their Second Amendment rights?

Better now?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:51:21 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:53:51 AM EDT
Man! Haven't you had enough of this yet? Quit poking the hornets nest bro!
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:58:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?



That's fine, whatever you think. Now which do you feel should be preeminent for firearms purchases -- Federal law, state law, or the Second Amendment?  That's the only question here.

Once again, change all references about  "marijuana" to "peanut butter" for your reading purposes in this thread. Note that I have already said I don't want to discuss that issue in this thread at least a couple of times. Whatever you feel about "peanut butter" is fine with me for the moment.

There is a new 4473 coming out, you know, and we might just encounter a similar situation in some other area.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:16:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 10:22:26 AM EDT by PeteCO]

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?



That's fine, whatever you think. Now which do you feel should be preeminent for firearms purchases -- Federal law, state law, or the Second Amendment?  That's the only question here.

Once again, change all references about  "marijuana" to "peanut butter" for your reading purposes in this thread. Note that I have already said I don't want to discuss that issue in this thread at least a couple of times. Whatever you feel about "peanut butter" is fine with me for the moment.


There is a new 4473 coming out, you know, and we might just encounter a similar situation in some other area.



You sly devil, you!  You master of the printed word!

Your fucking thread topic is misleading, and your argument above is a flaming crock of shit.  If you want to post about:

"Now which do you feel should be preeminent for firearms purchases -- Federal law, state law, or the Second Amendment?  That's the only question here.", then just fucking say so.  

The pot issue is a red herring the size of Texas, and you expect people to "decipher" your post and figure out that it's not about pot?  Gimme a break.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:23:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PeteCO:

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?



That's fine, whatever you think. Now which do you feel should be preeminent for firearms purchases -- Federal law, state law, or the Second Amendment?  That's the only question here.

Once again, change all references about  "marijuana" to "peanut butter" for your reading purposes in this thread. Note that I have already said I don't want to discuss that issue in this thread at least a couple of times. Whatever you feel about "peanut butter" is fine with me for the moment.


There is a new 4473 coming out, you know, and we might just encounter a similar situation in some other area.



You sly devil, you  You master of the printed word!

Your fucking thread topic is misleading, and your argument above is a flaming crock of shit.  If you want to post about:

"Now which do you feel should be preeminent for firearms purchases -- Federal law, state law, or the Second Amendment?  That's the only question here.", then just fucking say so.  

The pot issue is a red herring the size of Texas, and you expect people to "decipher" your post and figure out that it's not about pot?  Gimme a break.



So change the wording to "peanut butter" or however you want to phrase it. The answer to your wording for most people would probably be "it depends". That's because there is no specific example. That wouldn't tell us much. I suspect there are people who would vote "no" on legalization of "peanut butter" but would vote "yes" on this topic.

As I said before, I really don't give a shit why you think whatever you do about "peanut butter".  There are bigger issues. Like how much of the stuff on the 4473 is really constitutional?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:24:09 AM EDT
Would those of you who voted "No" care to elaborate?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:27:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 10:28:15 AM EDT by PeteCO]

Originally Posted By mattman42:
Would those of you who voted "No" care to elaborate?



I'll elaborate for them:

<law and order at all costs>
"You will respect mah the fed's authoritah!!"
</law and order at all costs>



Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:34:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mattman42:
Would those of you who voted "No" care to elaborate?



Just to maybe help or confuse the issue:

Suppose that state law allows one medicine but the Feds do not. Which law should rule for firearms purchases?

Suppose that the person committed some crime that was a felony under Federal law, but no crime at all under state law. A non-violent civil rights violation, perhaps. Maybe they called somebody the "n" word, or something.

We are assuming, of course, that the person has no other criminal record and has done no harm to anyone but themselves. If the person committed a violent felony, then I think we would all agree that restrictions on gun ownership are perfectly reasonable.

Should these kinds of "crimes" be sufficient to justify denying someone the right to own firearms for protection of their own home?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 11:01:45 AM EDT
I just thought of two parallel examples where the question might apply: porno and bongs.

Tommy Chong was producing glass bongs. The Feds knew that they could never get a conviction in his home state, or that any conviction was likely to be a misdemeanor, so they found some reactionary jurisdiction in Pennsylvania and got him on a Federal felony.

They could also very well do the same thing in porn cases -- pick the one jurisdiction in the country where they might get a conviction on dirty pictures and prosecute the person there -- even though the rest of the country might never convict. Felony at the Federal -- not even a complaint about disturbing the peace in their home state.

Should people who find themselves in those circumstances be denied the right to own firearms?

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 4:51:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?




Never thought I'd feel the need to kiss a Marine before...thanks JH22----you said it better than I did...
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:10:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?




Never thought I'd feel the need to kiss a Marine before...thanks JH22----you said it better than I did...



Think about Federal porno convictions, if that suits you better.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:12:17 PM EDT
Should you be able to buy them even though you take (insert prescription drug)?

Who cares.  You drink beer...should you be able to buy firearms?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:21:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?




Never thought I'd feel the need to kiss a Marine before...thanks JH22----you said it better than I did...



Think about Federal porno convictions, if that suits you better.




Where do you get that from what he posted???
He's asking you personally why you feel the need to come to a gun site and stir up all the cannibus talk.

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:23:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By PlaymoreMinds:

Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
I'm in FAVOR of drug legalization, and I'm sick of you banging this same drum all the time. I don't do drugs, but prohibition is fruitless and a monumental waste of resources. That said, legal or illegal, I would have nothing to do with users.

Isn't there a site where you'd be more at home, like bonghits.com or chronicfatty.com?




Never thought I'd feel the need to kiss a Marine before...thanks JH22----you said it better than I did...



Think about Federal porno convictions, if that suits you better.




Where do you get that from what he posted???
He's asking you personally why you feel the need to come to a gun site and stir up all the cannibus talk.




Once again, consider the same situation under porno laws, if that suits you. That is, if you are doing anything other than trying to get rid of a brain fart.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:25:52 PM EDT
I suppose you'd be much to mellow to shoot anyone anyway.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:26:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 5:28:20 PM EDT by PlaymoreMinds]

Originally Posted By wolfman97:




Once again, consider the same situation under porno laws, if that suits you. That is, if you are doing anything other than trying to get rid of a brain fart.



If that's how you wish to refer to yourself, fine....are you leaving?


Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:27:22 PM EDT
Should state-legal medical marijuana users be allowed to buy guns?  

Form 4473 asks if someone is a user of illegal drugs

You can still answer no to that question.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:29:09 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:29:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bob243:
Should state-legal medical marijuana users be allowed to buy guns?  

Form 4473 asks if someone is a user of illegal drugs

You can still answer no to that question.



I think the Feds would consider it a violation of law if someone in that situation did. I am pretty sure they would construe it in the Federal sense of the law. Don't they also specifically mention marijuana in the list? I could be wrong on that.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:08:44 PM EDT
If people who use alcohol are able to own guns I dont see why anybody who uses any drug should be prohibited from owning guns.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:20:39 PM EDT
Hey guys-if you don't want to read the thread, try not clicking on the topic.
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 5:45:49 AM EDT
California law would not prevent a person arrested and convicted for marijuana possession from buying/owning a firearm.  Even a sales conviction would not prevent you from buying a gun in Cali if you got it plead down to a misdemeanor which is common for firts time sales arrests.
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 6:03:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bob243:
Should state-legal medical marijuana users be allowed to buy guns?  

Form 4473 asks if someone is a user of illegal drugs

You can still answer no to that question.



+1

With that said, beer causes far more accidents, beer should be illegal.  
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 6:19:24 AM EDT
If it is medically perscribed by a licensed doctor to treat/cure a legit illness. its no longer an illegal drug untill it becomes abused like painkillers or morphen,etc.
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 6:22:42 AM EDT
Those who smoke weed should be allowed to own guns, regardless of the legal or illegal ways in which they obtain or smoke marijuana.

My opinion of course.
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 6:45:07 AM EDT
Yes they should be allowed to.

Most people on here have heard this before: "Hold my beer and watch this"
You know the result of that.
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 6:53:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
California law would not prevent a person arrested and convicted for marijuana possession from buying/owning a firearm.  Even a sales conviction would not prevent you from buying a gun in Cali if you got it plead down to a misdemeanor which is common for firts time sales arrests.



The Federal form asks if they are a user. If they answered "yes" -- as in, currently a medical user -- I imagine they would be denied by the Feds, despite California law.
Link Posted: 10/9/2005 6:56:11 AM EDT
Should ALCOHOLICS be allowed to buy guns?

No! The states GIVE guns to alcoholics, along with badges!
Top Top