Ban on marijuana users owning guns is unconstitutional, U.S. judge rules

Chong: Who is it?
Cheech: It's me, Dave. Open up, man, I got the stuff.
(More knocks)
Chong: Who is it?
Cheech: It's me, Dave, man. Open up, I got the stuff.
Chong: Who?
Cheech: It's, Dave, man. Open up, I think the cops saw me come in here.
(More knocks)
Chong: Who is it?
Cheech: It's, Dave, man. Will you open up, I got the stuff with me.
Chong: Who?
Cheech: Dave, man. Open up.
Chong: Dave?
Cheech: Yeah, Dave. c'mon, man, open up, I think the cops saw me.
Chong: Dave's not here.
Cheech: No, man, I'm Dave, man.
(Sharp knocks at the door)
Cheech: Hey, c'mon, man.
Chong: Who is it?
Cheech: It's Dave, man. Will you open up? I got the stuff with me.
Chong: Who?
Cheech: Dave, man. Open up.
Chong: Dave?
Cheech: Yeah, Dave.
Chong: Dave's not here.
Cheech: What the hell? No, man, I am Dave, man. Will you...
(More knocks)
Cheech: c'mon! Open up the door, will you? I got the stuff with me, I think the cops saw me.
Chong: Who is it?
Cheech: Oh, what the hell is it...c'mon. Open up the door! It's Dave!
Chong: Who?
Cheech: Dave! D-A-V-E! Will you open up the goddam door!
Chong: Dave?
Cheech: Yeah, Dave!
Chong: Dave?
Cheech: Right, man. Dave. Now will you open up the door?
Chong: Dave's not here.
 
I was just about to type the same thing. Rights aren’t taken away if you’re under the influence of substances. If you’re drunk you still have the use of all other rights, if you’re high on heroin you can still vote and the government still needs a warrant to enter your house without permission. If you smoke meth the government can’t place troops in your house during peace time.
If Trump is found guilty he can still become President, so if you smoke or drink? WTF. [rofl]
 
I heard something about this yesterday talking about how it just got overturned, conveniently maybe, for Hunter Bidens trial/court case. They were joking that HB is now the face of the 2A. lol

A question also about this weed thing if anyone has looked into it further;

@Darksideblues42 maybe

How does that federal law play out if you take into consideration that D8 (Delta 8) very low THC count, like .003%, and is a THC/CBD combination, is federally legal to buy and use and can be bought in convenience stores and even sent through USPS to places where D9 (regular strength weed) is still illegal?

If the feds say it’s such a small dose and therefore legal, does that preclude gun owners or still get them theoretically jammed up?
 
If Trump is found guilty he can still become President, so if you smoke or drink? WTF. [rofl]
if he's found guilty of insurrection or rebellion he can't be president under the 14th Amendment but that's about it. He could smoke all the meth he wanted and if found guilty could still run and be elected president. But not being able to own a firearm because you smoked the Devils Lettuce 20 years ago or had a DUI is absurd to me in all honesty. No other Right has such restrictions and why should they. The convicted felon question was overturned for one guy in Maryland or Delaware i believe. he defrauded food stamps of 1-2k worth of money because he was working under the table for a land scraping company or something like that.
 
I heard something about this yesterday talking about how it just got overturned, conveniently maybe, for Hunter Bidens trial/court case. They were joking that HB is now the face of the 2A. lol

A question also about this weed thing if anyone has looked into it further;

@Darksideblues42 maybe

How does that federal law play out if you take into consideration that D8 (Delta 8) very low THC count, like .003%, and is a THC/CBD combination, is federally legal to buy and use and can be bought in convenience stores and even sent through USPS to places where D9 (regular strength weed) is still illegal?

If the feds say it’s such a small dose and therefore legal, does that preclude gun owners or still get them theoretically jammed up?
Delta 8 is technically unregulated under the law, as the law specifies the chemical name for Delta-9

(I am not a Lawyer)
 
Anyone who would advocate you should be denied - for life - your 2nd Amendment rights because of marijuana - is truly ignorant about marijuana. I also find it interesting they make no such claim about alcohol or even prescription drugs, many of which are far far worse in their effects and impact on society.

It's not even legal for the Federal Government to ban simple possession. Interstate trade, sure. But nowhere in the enumerated powers of the Constitution is the Federal Government even enumerated the power to ban you from growing or possessing a simple plant.
 
Anyone who would advocate you should be denied - for life - your 2nd Amendment rights because of marijuana - is truly ignorant about marijuana. I also find it interesting they make no such claim about alcohol or even prescription drugs, many of which are far far worse in their effects and impact on society.

It's not even legal for the Federal Government to ban simple possession. Interstate trade, sure. But nowhere in the enumerated powers of the Constitution is the Federal Government even enumerated the power to ban you from growing or possessing a simple plant.
I agree. You could use percs, oxy, or adderal or a cocaine derivative by prescription and abuse the living hell out them and be ok under the 4473. But if you use Satans Cilantro you should rot in hell before owning a firearm.
 
With it currently being legal in 38 states, D.C. and four out of five U.S. territories for medical use, and the majority of those jurisdictions for recreational use, it's surprising that a bill hasn't been brought before congress (or at least hasn't gotten the publicity it deserves) to remove marijuana from Schedule I and place it in the same category as alcohol and tobacco.
 
With it currently being legal in 38 states, D.C. and four out of five U.S. territories for medical use, and the majority of those jurisdictions for recreational use, it's surprising that a bill hasn't been brought before congress (or at least hasn't gotten the publicity it deserves) to remove marijuana from Schedule I and place it in the same category as alcohol and tobacco.
Theres no end in sight either. At this point the only thing thats going to push federal legalization hard is a court. The pot lobby isnt greasing enough of our shit lord leaders to get them interested in doing the right thing.
 
Theres no end in sight either. At this point the only thing thats going to push federal legalization hard is a court. The pot lobby isnt greasing enough of our shit lord leaders to get them interested in doing the right thing.
I think it's more of a "too much money coming from the drug companies" thing that the politicians on both sides are trying to keep flowing.
 
With it currently being legal in 38 states, D.C. and four out of five U.S. territories for medical use, and the majority of those jurisdictions for recreational use, it's surprising that a bill hasn't been brought before congress (or at least hasn't gotten the publicity it deserves) to remove marijuana from Schedule I and place it in the same category as alcohol and tobacco.
Scheduling is an executive action. There's no need for a bill, just for the executive to tell his DEA to change its rating.

The irony is that most of the drugs in their sample list are either widely accepted as having various medical benefits or are in the midst of extensive research and transitioning to "breakthrough" status right now.
Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote.
 
It's because everyone now treats guns like they're just shy of nuclear weapons and anyone with a criminal history can't be trusted with these weapons. And we as gun owners allow it when we say "well or course a murderer shouldn't have access to guns". Instead, how about "a murderer shouldn't have access to society".
I'm no fan of weed, and couldn't give two cares if they threw all the stoners in jail for life.
But criminal actions shouldn't put any restriction on your rights. If felons are so dangerous they can't own a gun, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to leave the prison? Or just kill them? It would at least give the parole boards pause for thought, knowing the monster they're going to let out will be legally armed in 15 minutes.
 
Scheduling is an executive action. There's no need for a bill, just for the executive to tell his DEA to change its rating.

The irony is that most of the drugs in their sample list are either widely accepted as having various medical benefits or are in the midst of extensive research and transitioning to "breakthrough" status right now.
Cocaine is Schedule 2, does that mean I don't become a prohibited person if I call up Hunter for some booger sugar?
 
I'm no fan of weed, and couldn't give two cares if they threw all the stoners in jail for life.

I would say the same about drunks. I saw more drama, violence and experienced more messed up stuff from alcoholic relatives when I was a kid than I ever did from any stoners. I'll take a room full of stoners over drunks any day of the week.
 
Back
Top Bottom