Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by mseric, Feb 23, 2014.
Appreciate your response C3
Exactly my point. They are not "controlled", they are prohibited
As much as you would like it to be, the "controversy" does not have a damn thing to do with the legality. There is "controversy" over speed limits. That does not mean speed limits are null and void
As pointed out by another. Marihuana illegal in all 50 states as well as under Federal law. A couple of States have made some exceptions to enforcement. It is still ILLEGAL.
This is true, however enforcement now in the 3 states that have legalized on the state level are beyond the point of no return. There isn't enough storage and financial resource for prosecution and incarceration.
The current AG is painting law enforcment into a conflicting corner where they cannot win, unless they attach a major rub like the trade off of gun rights which will open another prohibition mess related directly leading to a very visible Constitution violation.
This will most likely play out directionly by or before the '16 election, IMO.
Legalized pot, gun control tied to medical history and gay marriage rights nearly nationwide.
And machine guns are illegal as well except as outlined by laws passed in 1934, 1969 and 1986 (forgive me if I am off a year or two here or there. Didn't look it up).
The 55MPH national speed law was passed in the early '70s (IIRC it was 1972). Now there is no national speed law.
Marijuana is not illegal in Colorado and Washington. Medical marijuana is not illegal in several other states including California. I submit that marijuana will soon become legal. Or maybe decriminalized, no longer listed as a Class 1 controlled substance or whatever.
Decriminalized? Seriously? Back during the Draconian 55MPH Federally Mandated Speed Law you could get away with going 65 in Montana because the cops there refused to enforce it. Did that make speeding legal? I think not. It made the law ineffective and therefore it was disputable. There were no Federal highway patrol officers out there.
These days we have both State and Federal officers trying to enforce firearms laws. Oftentimes they are at odds with one another. Does that invalidate their authority? The law? The crime? The intent?
No. It does none of that. It does however muddy the waters in regards to the rights of the individual. The rights of the citizen. It muddies the waters, thereby reducing clarity. If there is a lack of clarity then the fact is that marijuana is not "patently" illegal.
Your first statement "Marijuana is not illegal in Colorado and Washington" is incorrect.
This whole thread was started because of a WA State resident was denied a permit to carry because he uses Medical Marijuana. Denied because Medical Marijuana use is Illegal in the entire United States including WA State.
When anyone applies for a concealed weapons permit with Richland police, they have to follow these federal restrictions.
It does not get any clearer than this.
Post #6 explains The ATF's requirements for all FFL across the country, it says that Marijuana use even Medical use is Illegal. Informing the FFL across the country that selling a firearm to any Marijuana user is illegal and a Felony.
If you ask any FFL in WA, CA, CO or OR if they are willing to sell a firearm to a Known Marijuana user you will get an across the board. "NO, That would be Illegal"
This is pretty clear, cut and dried as well.
In post #12 I listed several instances where the Federal Government is Raiding, arresting and prosecuting Marijuana users and growers. Each and every one of these cases happened in States like WA, that have Mislead their Citizens into believing that Marijuana is Legal. These people believed, as you do, that their State can actually Legalize marijuana. These misguided soles are now doing time in Federal courts and Federal prison because Marijuana is "Legal"? I don't think so.
If these States that have legalized pot actually believed they could do such a thing, where are they when their citizens are being arrested by the Feds. If these politicians, AG's and DA's are convinced that they have "Legalized" pot and the Feds cannot do anything about it, you would think they would be battling side by side with these poor lost souls. But, they are not.
Not one DA, AG, or Local Law Enforcement agency has stepped up to help these people. In all of these cases you don't see any local LEO saying "hey you there, DEA guy, leave that guy alone, you can't arrest him, Marijuana is legal here. In fact just the opposite is true, in some of these raids local LEO assisted Federal agents. Why, because Pot is clearly and without a doubt Illegal.
In none of these case listed do you see any Ambulance chasers coming to their rescue claiming the Feds cannot enforce Federal laws. Not at all, what you see is these people are all pleading Guilty and paying the price. All but one, he plead "not Guilty" and lost. He will now do 5 years in Federal Prison and has given up his second amendment rights forever.
In post #36 the Oregon State Supreme Court ruling was posted. It clearly says that although Ms Willis can have her permit she can still be arrested by Federal agents and the State will not interfere with Federal prosecution as Marijuana is Illegal.
In post # 55 you said this.
"I am of the opinion that the Feds do not have the Constitutional authority to regulate firearms at all, and the same goes for marijuana. I believe it is a direct violation their Constitutional Authority at the very least, Article VI notwithstanding."
I agree with this. I also do not think the Federal Government should be allowed to regulate many things including firearms. That said, what we believe or what are opinions are does not matter. What matters is what the Present Laws are and violating these laws, regardless of what we believe, will land our buts in Federal court and Federal Prison. It is really that simple.
Again I say, the legalization of marijuana is an end run for disarmament.
I will add that I have No sympathy for any gun owner that ran out and got a prescription for marijuana and wasn't smart enough to know they were forfeiting their right to own guns.
better judged by twelve than carried by six.
Part of this is due to the MSM and the Lawmakers in these States misleading the public. Intentionally I might add. They continue to use the phrase "legalize" when nothing could be further from the truth. IMO, they have an agenda, they always have an agenda, and it is working. Far to many people in these States are duped into believing Marijuana is Legal and one day when they realize they have lost Right to Keep and Bear Arms, they will wake up and say, "Dude what the hell happened" I thought this stuff was legal. We got screwed man".
Do you have a link to the specific LAW that states your position? BATF's policy does not make it law.
Federal Law has been posted on here several times. It clearly states that Marijuana is still an Schedule I Controlled Substance and it's use and possession as far as Firearms are concerned is in violation of the 1968 Gun Control Act.
This is Federal Law, not ATF Policy.
The ATF is officially informing all FFL holders in the United States that ATF "Policy" on Marijuana is to abide by Federal Law and not State Law.
The ATF is in no way making laws, they are enforcing existing laws. Laws that have been on the book since 1968.
Federal law doesn't recognize state law.
State laws de criminalizing or making legal marijuana do not comply with federal laws regarding marijuana, especially pertaining to firearms. So if you want your guns don't apply for a medical marijuana card or even claim that you use pot.
I still contend that having a card does not mean that you are a user. Hell, I have been accused of being a marijuana user often, based on the presumption that because I advocate for legalization I must therefore be a user. I am not. I have done a great deal of research on the subject because I have several people in my life who have terminal illnesses and they can (and some do) benefit from marijuana use. One of those people (who has since passed away from cancer) was using it heavily in the last year of her life, and her life was far, far better because of it. Her daughter obtained a medical marijuana "prescription" card so that she could obtain the pot for her mother. The daughter has never used it and she never has had an inclination to use it. So I know from experience that this does indeed happen.
Pot tickets for small amounts cost less than $300 around here; how much would a illegal weapons possession charge cost me? Yup, don't document your dirty little secrets for the draconian dumbarsses running the show.
I would probably benefit from some amount of anti-anxiety medication (yeah, shocker I know), but I wouldn't ask a doctor for any psychoactive medications with the government being sooooo involved in the doctor's business, probably even moreso in the future.
As much as I think this is not what one should have to do, it is certainly a prudent maneuver to keep the black Suburbans out of the driveway.
If you want to avoid that possibility utterly, you should also be careful who you let live in your house. At least our SS is polite; the ones I met were like well-dressed smurfs, tiny, but they did have the full-sized black SUV, no Trailblazer for those smurfs errr agents.
Forgive me for asking, what were the benefits? (JC, I really don't know.)
Amen, I never subscribed to the secret's are lies deal with the co-inhabitants.
Do not ever get in the black SUV with shade wearin' smurfs!
From my limited experience with cancer in my family, smoking marijuana helped relieve the nausea and pain associated with Chemo. If there are other benefits, I do not know.
Nausea and pain are big ones. The pain killing effects are almost immediate when it is taken through a vaporizer (rather than smoking it). It helps with appetite (the munchies are a good thing for people who need to gain weight), also it helps to attenuate the despair, suicidal feelings. It can help you sleep. People whi I know who have tried it swear by it.
Take a few minutes and watch this video regardless of which side you are on.
My dad was prescribed Dronabinol a generic version of Marinol through Kaiser. It is used as an appetite stimulant and for nausea control. It is in pill form and it does work extremely well. The pharmacy tells me it is a class 2C drug, but, that there is no issue, other than one has to be over 18 Y.O. to be able to pick it up at the pharmacy.
I would not have my extreme elderly dad smoke or use a vaporizer to ingest this variant of THC.
And I have no problem with your position. From what I have heard Marinol works wonders. Great stuff. Even better that Kaiser prescribes it and pays for it under their prescription drug program.
But if a person grows their own for whatever reason? What is wrong with that?
And in my example the patient (now deceased) was using marijuana through a vaporizer for two reasons, one being they could not smoke anything nor had they ever smoked anything. The vaporizer works just like a nebulizer does for asthma patients- I think they are actually the same damn thing. The patient breathes in the vapor and it takes immediate effect. All of the pill form drugs take a lot longer to take effect. Also the Marinol (and generic versions) do not address pain very well nor as quickly. YMMV