Marijuana Users Get Second Amendment Rights?

Marijuana is illegal at the federal level, period!

A bill trying to carve out a knothole for it and firearms will get blowback from both sides.

Shown Here:

Introduced in House (04/22/2021)

Gun Rights And Marijuana Act or the GRAM Act

This bill removes federal firearms-related restrictions on certain individuals who use or are addicted to marijuana.

Currently, federal firearms law prohibits the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to persons who are unlawful users of or addicted to a controlled substance. This bill exempts from the prohibition an adult whose use of or addiction to marijuana is lawful in the state or on the tribal lands where the person resides.

The anti gunners and the anti pot crowds will not vote for it.

2 Likes

I guess we have to agree on a few definitions.
Impaired = poor decision making
Poor decisions = harsher sentences.
Even the unimpaired, during a home invasion suffer unthinkable consequences!
Now that we’ve gotten over the fact that guns and drugs don’t mesh. Like everyone here has mentioned we have choice!!!

1 Like

I got to get you thinking about different angles because we all know that in a court of law that’s how things are. I have to put in a way where you can think about what if it was your daughter that had a medical condition where she needed that medication and that was the only medication that worked. Everyone is tribalistic subconsciously and that is exactly why the Democrats have succeeded to where they’re at because of the games they play. You got to fight fire with fire. Also go back to 1937 and look at the marihuana tax act and see how this whole thing actually came out of Corporations battling against each other because of hemp production and the cotton production in NC.
Marijuana used to be traded like tobacco over the boarder. Did You Know... Marijuana Was Once a Legal Cross-Border Import? | U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Momentarily you will become one of the individuals who is on my snooze list.

image

4 Likes

There are thousands of small outlier groups that want laws written specifically for them, to address their specific challenges. To me it comes down to control. Control of emotions, control of motor skills, control of the fight/flight mechanism. I’m a recovered drug addict, 30 years ago I landed on the streets of Denver, Las Vegas and Salt Lake City due to the abuse of drugs. We smoked, drank and shot anything we could get our hands on.
To me, if it changes the way you see the world, act, feel or react it also changes your decision making capabilities. Playing like your not altered because it’s “medical marijuana” doesn’t work for me. If you use a drug, any drug, and you are altered you should not have access to firearms. A prescription doesn’t change that.

3 Likes

I also thought you wanted a civilized discussion, but you just keep throwing out off the wall scenarios that would have to be sorted out in the courts, not to mention the fact that people who choose to impair themselves, regardless of the “drug” used, have made that choice of their own free will and may very well suffer some severe consequences for it.

I have to agree with @George98 at this point, and follow his example.

2 Likes

This is an interesting topic. I know there have been several democrat proposals to legalize marijuana. I’m not sure if anyone looked at this measure, but it was proposed by Rep Don Young (R-AK) and co-sponsored by Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL), Rep Brian Mast (R-FL) and Rep Mark Amodei (R-NV).
You would think we could get bipartisan support for considering whether marijuana should be reduced from a Schedule I controlled substance to a lesser level, making it legal, just like opiates lesser medications or take it off the schedules all together.
Like alcohol, if MJ were legal, you can still regulate driving and firearm possession while under the influence. Even if we started with legalizing medical MJ that would make many users of it legally able to possess a firearm since it would not be illegal use, so long as they are not under the influence.

6 Likes

Glad you agree!

I believe the thread started with an agenda and those don’t normally go well.

I believe he wanted to be a cheerleader for potheads with guns.

Anyway, be well and be safe, my friend!

George

1 Like

You hit the nail on the head. Under the influence or impaired is the key.

Seems like the bill seeks to carve out an exemption for those still breaking a federal law.

But that is why you lawyers make the big bucks! :innocent: :innocent:

3 Likes

Reading the condescension reminds me of a meeting at work back around 1990. Aerospace shop, mostly military, I recall purchase orders from the IAF (Israeli Air Force) and our main customer decided the implement a new matrix of requirements, including pre employment drug testing. Owner lets us know, so if any friends want to apply to make sure they’re clean. One of the older employees, pretty obviously a daily drinker, blurts out “we should test everyone now” to which the owner responds “I’d be afraid that we’d lose our best employees if we did that.”
Stoshu blurts out “but I don’t smoke pot.” Obviously missing the point, while those that smoked… felt flattered. Like many other things, pot can hurt, or it can help.

2 Likes

The problem and point that I don’t think was mentioned is the testing. You can test for ETOH to determine if you are drunk. You can’t test for MJ because the metabolite they test for stays in your system for up to 30 days, long after the “high” goes away. Same same for opioids, meth, etc. When someone invents a meter that can tell when you are “high” then they will legalize it just like booze. ERGO, they can make money.

The argument for or against is moot as long as the 4473 is a FEDERAL document and MJ is Illegal FEDERALLY you are banned from purchasing a firearm if you are addicted to, or a user of MJ. It doesn’t ban you from owning, it bans you from purchasing though an FFL. Using MJ in a state where it’s legal doesn’t prevent you from getting a car/truck/motorcycle license but it will prevent you from getting a CDL, Taxi, Limo etc license all of whom fall under 40 CFR (Code of FEDERAL Regulations).

I don’t know of any instance where someone had their gun rights removed for “popping positive” for any substance but I doggone sure wouldn’t like to have that on the other side of the isle if defending a lawful shoot ESPECIALLY in a civil case. In case you don’t know: A criminal case is where you can loose your freedom. A civil case is where you will loose your a$$, even if you win.

Cheers,

Craig6

4 Likes

There is only one solution: legalize the use of ALL DRUGS and ban AR-15s. Do it for the children.

4 Likes

@Mike270 I don’t think you are properly in touch with your progressive side.

Legalize all drugs and after 30 days if you can pass a piss test get a free AR-15 and 1K of ammo.

Cheers,

Craig6

4 Likes

Nah that’s Afghanistan. You’ll also get a 40mm launcher with a fully loaded blackhawk.

2 Likes

Can’t imagine what scrips Ole joe biden is on…now that’s the stuff that shouldn’t be combined with shotguns and back porches…
Mike’s got it right as far as progressive…needle dispensary next to the gun buyback table…progress, baby!

3 Likes

If only people knew about the origin of the cartels armory and operation fast and furious

Lets go Brandon!

2 Likes

I knew you would come around George haha

I say that the government should give We The People, what We The People want.

That tells you everything you need to know about Forbes, I’m sure the chinese would love to have a millions more Americans stoned out of their gourd. :crazy_face: I call fake news!!!
I don’t think any right thinking American wants to see MJ legalized federally.

Company: Integrated Whale Media Investments, China (Hong Kong) (95%); Forbes family (5%)

Editor: Randall Lane

First issue: September 15, 1917; 104 years ago

Editor-in-chief: Steve Forbes

Categories: Business magazine

Frequency: Fortnightly

Total circulation (2020): 657,215

1 Like