Medical Marijuana Card Holders Lost Their 2nd Amendment Rights Today

a reply to: SentientCentenarian

Sigh... reluctant star for you, I wish it wasnt true

a reply to: infolurker

first of all, the 9th circuit court is not the supreme court, this is still open for appeals.

Second the 9th circuit court did not created a new law, the base their ruling using the Public Safety and Recreation Firearms Use Protection Act.

So this is base on existing laws, now how this will be extended to cover people using marijuana cards holders is base on interpretation, but is still open for scrutiny by the supreme court.

Now how far does the now many gun owners that will lose their licensing under this interpretation of the law will go to keep their second amendment.

Next is the Supreme court.

This will be a very interesting issue to keep an eye on.

OK so let me get this straight I can legally grow basically any poisonous plant such as caster bean plant which ricin comes from as well as atropa belladonna (deadly nightshade), all without the feds batting so much as a single eyelash but a pothead buying a gun it absolutely atrocious.... How does that make the minutest amount of sense..
. I mean seriously WTF force children to get vaccines that are "potentially" harmful but don't you dare grow and use a plant that harms NO ONE... Shows the shear incompetence of our great nations "elected officials" real pieces of donkey doody.... OK they can all eat a dick up til they hiccup and get on before they get spit on

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
"what prevents the same from happening with prescription drugs?"
You just laid out the next step in their strip your freedoms agenda.
Anyone on antidepressants or Schedule 2 pain meds will be next.

Yes, this is going too far. Even banning guns from people on the no-fly list is going too far because they can get on there by accident and there is no due process.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: infolurker

first of all, the 9th circuit court is not the supreme court, this is still open for appeals.

Second the 9th circuit court did not created a new law, the base their ruling using the Public Safety and Recreation Firearms Use Protection Act.

So this is base on existing laws, now how this will be extended to cover people using marijuana cards holders is base on interpretation, but is still open for scrutiny by the supreme court.

Now how far does the now many gun owners that will lose their licensing under this interpretation of the law will go to keep their second amendment.

Next is the Supreme court.

This will be a very interesting issue to keep an eye on.

Your last two lines mean everything, Marg... especially
if Scalia is replaced with another progressive justice.
Timing is everything, Rule 3: Never let them see you sweat.

I recently renewed my CCW permit and noticed this on my application. Although medical marijuana is legal in my state , they don't allow CCW permits to be issues to MMJ cardholders. I thought that was interesting and it makes sense. The comparison to alcohol is not legitimate because alcohol is LEGAL federally by those over the age of 21. Another interesting note , it is NOT legal to carry your firearm concealed if you are consuming alcohol. I really don't see what the issue is. If you have a medical marijuana license , you are playing with fire anyway since it is still illegal by the Federal Govt. I'm not saying I don't support it , I'm just looking at the facts.

a reply to: derfreebie

I know, the supreme court right now newest appointees may have their own agendas regarding certain issues like gun rights.

Hard to tell what they may do.

I don't foresee this law standing up to scrutiny for long. Primarily because many places are on the advent of recreational marijuana laws being passed. For it to stand, they would have to make owning guns illegal across the board.

At the same time as stated, they are opening the doors for controlling people's rights who have any prescription which will turn people to self-medication without prescriptions. Which in turn will lead to higher narcotics issues within the laws. Since people are already fed up with drug laws and Big Pharma don't want to lose their business over people wanting to keep their guns / rights . . . there will be a lawsuit down the line to reverse this.

Here is the tricky part - which was difficult to argue with many people, those who smoke weed, those who drink alcohol, those who do both, those who do neither - a mixture of all of these and throw in a firearm.

Let's be fair, legal or illegal is a moot point in today's world, legislation is based off of current events, trends, emotions, and subjective agendas - look at the Confederate 'battle' flag, marijuana, genders, and even religious preferences. Nothing is based on logic. Being said, you cannot convince another of the moral or legal issues of Marijuana use any more than you can convince someone that Catholicism is better than Presbyterian.

This thread will be 1000 pages long and you wont get anywhere.

There is one fact, that you have never heard and will never hear in mainstream discussion... the difference between smoking pot and drinking beer is MASSIVE. and yes, both relate to your firearm.

Drinking a beer, paired with a big thick juicy steak is just that, a delicious pairing of food and drink - one may, depending on the individual, drink one, two, three, even six beers without a hint of impairment - that's why we measure BAL during a FST. it measures it on a scale.

Unfortunately, and some might argue this, that one does not smoke a joint, simply because they like the taste of the smoke, and it goes well with their meal - nay, the sole reason one smokes marijuana is for the results of THC, in which the symptoms 'could' make handling a weapon a bad idea.

Before you say, not true, after I smoke, I'm totally okay, I could handle a firearm, much more than a beer or liquor drinker. If you make that comment, then you've already dissolved the reason to make it 'medical' in the first place. no more than taking an ibuprofen for the taste if it fails to dull any pain.

I for one, support MEDICAL weed usage, children, elderly, everyone who needs it, opiates and pain killer pills are a dangerous path - however, there are a mast majority of pro-legalized weed folks who wanted it passed without just cause, and now they are in a pickle.

For the record, I believe all 'L' words are a bad idea - being legislation. I'm in support of a generally healthy and moral community, however impossible now, I don't have any ideas or suggestions for this nation, I really don't. but I can say, legalizing certain things or criminalizing this or that has a great deal of unforeseen consequences.

I will offer this, if you are pro-MM, and you are upset about gun legislation tied to it, be careful how you go about it and think back on what I said earlier - no one can say (as an argument) that they only smoke weed for the taste, and then expect the same rights/protection as a alcohol drinker. Its a blurry path that will just make you seem silly.

I hope some of this made sense and might provide some insight on the angles being worked in this argument - I would say the same to people who would try to raise the BAL for driving a vehicle, and then get upset when having a gun on you with a .100 level is illegal and is 'stripping' your rights.

originally posted by: ColdChillin
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Bro, if you think you aren't on a list and your IP addresses used to log in to sites like this one aren't known and catalogued...I mean, you don't actually think that, right?

Of course I'm on some lists, but it was never volunteered. If I want to have the occasional visit with Mary Jane I'm not going to kiss and tell. In fact there have been some strange phone stuff when I talk with like minded people lately, so yeah, they probably have me on a list or two.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Interesting side note on the phone stuff. Awhile back around 2005, while talking on my cell to like minded friends about 9/11, I would hear quite frequently clicks on the line that sounded like the kind you hear picking up a phone on a shared landline. We would joke that it was "them" listening.

I've never purchased a gun, but I always had a feeling if I tried, between my medical marijuana card, my participation on ATS, or some other related reason I'd get denied.

We're all on lists. ATS is basically a registration site for subversives. It's only a matter of time before members of sites like these are banned the sale of firearms.

Is there even any attempt for justification on this? Sounds to me like Refer Madness: The Sequel

a reply to: infolurker

And what is being done to combat this on capitol hill?

Anything? Anyone?

a reply to: infolurker

I guess they've decided that medical cannabis makes people who use it anti-authoritarian. I suppose it's possible, but I think that medical cannabis makes people more intelligent. There's a well-renowned psychiatrist who says that Albert Einstein was very anti-authoritarian. I could have predicted this. They started this experiment in Montana in the last year or two.

I have never had the need to own a firearm beyond a very good pellet gun. I'm starting to think overall that Portugal or Spain might be the best places to live in the world.

originally posted by: MysticPearl
Well in a place like CA where it very well could be legalized in a few months, you then wouldn't have to disclose whether or not you're a marijuana user.

They might ask but you can lie. You wouldn't be in a database as you would if you're a medical marijuana user.

Why would this even apply in a state like Oregon? It's legal there. You don't need a medical card.

BTW, there's a loophole. Can't buy guns when a medical marijuana patient but can own guns as a medical marijuana patient. You only forfeit your right to buy new ones. So, stalk up on medicine right before you card expires which happens every year and in the period before renewing it, go buy some guns. Then renew. You've broken no laws if you follow that route.

But when you have to resort to loophole exploiting just to keep things running "normal", it means the whole system all along had been explicitly designed to NOT work. It's as absurd as requiring an "authorization" everytime you wanted your car keys.

originally posted by: InFriNiTee
a reply to: infolurker

I guess they've decided that medical cannabis makes people who use it anti-authoritarian. I suppose it's possible, but I think that medical cannabis makes people more intelligent. There's a well-renowned psychiatrist who says that Albert Einstein was very anti-authoritarian. I could have predicted this. They started this experiment in Montana in the last year or two.

I have never had the need to own a firearm beyond a very good pellet gun. I'm starting to think overall that Portugal or Spain might be the best places to live in the world.

If people don't do crap about their gun ownership rights and just let all kinds of BS go on endlessly, you might need "weapons" beyond a GATLING gun.
If it comes to that, hiring "representatives" for a job where they act against their voters' rights (aka those which are paying for their jobs) is akin to hiring a lawyer to go against its own client. Comical, really.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Is going the right way, it starts on the lower courts until it reach the supreme court, legislation is not really needed as nobody will touch the second amendment for now.

I just bought 150 rounds of factory .44 magnum for less than $45. LOL

How many years is a CCW usually good for?

This should definitely go before SCOTUS.

I feel the need, as I always do, to say that while I personally loathe guns, don't want a gun, and would never own a gun, I defend the rights of all non-criminal citizens to own them. The second amendment exists for a reason. Even if I would never avail myself of that right, it exists and must be upheld imho.

This is indeed a disturbing and perhaps just as importantly, irrational imo, precedent. Even if you were to allow that somehow, some way using cannabis renders one more likely to commit a violent act (which I do not believe for one second, quite the contrary,) what about those who had a card at one time... then decided to stop using? It's just nonsensical to me on multiple levels.

Peace.

a reply to: infolurker

Will keep an eye on this, thanks for the info, was not aware of this......ugh