It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Surrender Your Guns, Police Tell Hawaiian Medical Marijuana Patients

page: 3
43
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I think the problem is the collision between State and Federal law. I doubt this will be unique to Hawaii until Federal Law is updated, if it ever is. No matter what the State laws are, it's still illegal to the Fed's.

Recreational use exists only because the Fed's have chosen to not act yet and I suspect they could stop it at will. Only public opinion stops them now I think.




posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
Liberals.




Yet they wonder why we oppose them on most issues. "Why can't you just meet us half way?" they say.

Well guys, this is why.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

For me, guns is generally the only place where I refuse to compromise anymore.

Damned near all other avenues are open for discussion and resolution.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Any prohibition on guns is no more effective than the prohibition of any other substance/item.

When alcohol was banned, it was produced en masse and RICO groups profited - bringing with it lots of crime and murder

When illegal narcotics were banned, it is smuggled/produced en masse and RICO groups + small time dealers profit - bringing with it lots of crime and murder

If guns were banned, they would be kept/smuggled/built en masse and have little impact on the overall murder rate.

And unless HI is doing some illegal gun registration scheme, the letters are likely sent out to all recipients of a medical use card. It is likely a fishing expedition, designed to ferret out gun owners. Actually surrendoring your firearms could allow them to ID you, and nothing would stop them from charging you with a state crime or referring their evidence to the Federal Government for prosecution as a prohibited person possesing a firearm.

Times like this make me thankful I live in a sane red state, as well as having no major medical problems requiring regular use of any medication. It is absolutely not right for Citizens of the US to be denied a Constitutional right over their desire to use alternative medication outside the regular big pharma cash-cow paradigm (their "medication" is actually highly addictive).



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Awesome video I had never seen ... thanks so much!



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn


Agreed


There aren't that many issues I care enough about to draw a line in the sand over. IMO the 2nd provides for an enforceable with the Gov. They ensure our other rights are preserved, as well as deter any attempts to turn our republic into a tyranny. Minus some administrative changes, like FBI allowing non-FFL access to NICS I don't see myself supporting any legislation affecting guns. The opposition has shown itself to be untrustworthy, willing to sling untruths and fear monger when it suits their needs. I can't, in good conscience, consider any compromise on this issue for fear of a hidden agenda designed to defang a crucial human right.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555


I agree with your assessment Blaine, and you are absolutely correct in that per federal law its use makes you a "prohibited person."

However, I believe this case is unique in that it represents the first time a State government has taken action to disarm Citizens under this law. There are actually very few Federal prosecutions for disabled person possessing firearm, as it is usually handled at the State level as well.

I am unsure if other states have willing ignored this, or just haven't had time/energy/resources to address it, but I can't recall another instance happening in another state. I could be wrong on that though



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

In case you missed my post earlier, all guns must be registered in Hawaii, unless you want a felony and serious prison time hanging over your head every time you want to plink a few rounds.

The list of legal, registered gun owners in this state is shared with the feds.

Being a legal gun owner out here is a very restricted, very precarious situation. The 2nd amendment is not exactly respected by the state government.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: VariableConstant


I don't plink, as my guns are for defensive use only. However, I was not aware of this.

In that case, sounds like a typical hypocritical and perplexing action by the liberal state. States like Hawaii will criticize local officials who cooperate with the federal government for arresting/deporting illegal immigrants, but when it comes to cooperating with the feds to harass gun owners then its ok?

What about their very own law permitting medical use of the substance? They'll ignore federal law there, but since it involves guns they're all gung-ho about it again? Glad to see how much Hawaii cares about our Constitution, though. Darn sunshine patriots.

How about actually going after the criminals, and not people who register their guns/respond to gun ban letters. Anyone who would register their gun is not someone who will be committing crimes. Criminals meanwhile will continue to have their unregistered guns, while using all kinds of drugs and committing all kinds of violent crimes. Bravo, Hawaii. You're a model state. If the end game is to be as backwards and whimsical as possible, that is.

How about we actually prosecute someone after they've broken a law that has an actual victim? You know, since minority report isn't a real thing.

edit on 11/29/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Does federal law clearly state the same for patients who are under the influence of prescription "palliatives" as well? Why does no one seem to think it is suspicious that they crack down so relentlessly on people who use a medicinal plant that grows out of the ground, yet do not hold the same standards for those who use addictive, poisonous prescription chemicals or alcohol to medicate themselves? Somehow those known dangerous substances are acceptable for use with a firearm?

Anyone who supports this nonsense without question needs their head examined. These bastards are being exposed for what they are and know their time is short. So why not kick the # out of the little guy as much as possible on their way down? Attack the rights of the sick and vulnerable. Spread the fear and hopelessness. Sink their scrabbling claws into whatever they can grab onto.

It's like every super villain in every movie there ever was. They always do # like this when they know they're going to be defeated. If everyone just hangs in there, this will be over soon.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
I wish you lot were consistent with your outrage.

Laws to screw us little people are enacted all the time and you guys are happy about it, but as soon as they come for your guns it's the end of the world.

This is why we are being screwed over, wake up to it already.


edit on 29-11-2017 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen


Unfortunately, as much as I agree with what you're saying, they look at RX drugs differently. The law references (to paraphrase) "user of an illegal substance, or unlawful user or addiction to a narcotic/prescription medicine." If you're a prescribed user of a legal substance that is not addicted to said substance, then you are not under disability at that point.

It is pretty ridiculous, if you ask me. And I agree, the bastards should fry for what they've done to us for the past 100 or so years. Right around the time NFA, Federal reserve and things like that were happening if you ask me. Our country underwent a radical transformation, where freedom as we know it today looks nothing like the liberty, self determination and individualism our people enjoyed in the past.

That is the future I want to see. Not the one with an ever present nanny state that threatens you with incarceration "for your own good."

That is what Real America is all about. We're Citizens, not subjects.
edit on 11/29/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


What laws are you referring to? And are these laws restricting a Constitutional right or just something you don't like?



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: VariableConstant


I don't plink, as my guns are for defensive use only. However, I was not aware of this.

In that case, sounds like a typical hypocritical and perplexing action by the liberal state. States like Hawaii will criticize local officials who cooperate with the federal government for arresting/deporting illegal immigrants, but when it comes to cooperating with the feds to harass gun owners then its ok?

What about their very own law permitting medical use of the substance? They'll ignore federal law there, but since it involves guns they're all gung-ho about it again? Glad to see how much Hawaii cares about our Constitution, though. Darn sunshine patriots.

How about actually going after the criminals, and not people who register their guns/respond to gun ban letters. Anyone who would register their gun is not someone who will be committing crimes. Criminals meanwhile will continue to have their unregistered guns, while using all kinds of drugs and committing all kinds of violent crimes. Bravo, Hawaii. You're a model state. If the end game is to be as backwards and whimsical as possible, that is.

How about we actually prosecute someone after they've broken a law that has an actual victim? You know, since minority report isn't a real thing.


Oh, I agree with you completely. This state is backwards and hypocritical in many ways, but I do love living here, so I'll have to deal with it. Like I said, I'm really glad I never renewed my medical card.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: VariableConstant


I know
That wasn't directed at you or anything, and I should have probably posted it as its own reply!

It is a beautiful state, no disputing that. I am just thankful I'm not sick and in need of something like that. How do you choose safe healthcare vs. losing a cherished right? Leave it to a government (or in this case, multiple governments) to create such a paradoxical choice potential to begin with.

If only government knew *how* to keep its hand out of places it doesn't belong



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I would like to point out here that our founding fathers believed the purpose of government was to secure the unalienable rights of human beings.

We know this because they write in the DOI:



"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."


Securing these rights would include using any and all means to secure our unalienable rights - such as preventing foreign/domestic enemies from implementing tyranny, by raising armies for national defense and enforcing laws that promoted our unalienable rights. It does not include creating laws (any laws, as a matter of fact) to restrict any unalienable right. The second amendment is an unalienable right, as are all 10 amendments in the BOR. Therefore, ipso facto, the creation of any such law (including NFA, GCA) that has an effect of infringing on this amendment is clearly outside the proscribed scope and purpose of government and is unconstitutional.

If I lived in Hawaii, I would not register any firearm I owned. You are not obliged to follow an unconstitutional law. If they somehow figured out I had them, I would refuse to comply. If they forced my hand, I would just so happen to remember the boating accident I was involved in that resulted in total loss of my gun collection.

Given that Hawaii is surrounded by water, I have a feeling that a lot of gun owners in HI are going to be involved in these horrible boating accidents. The horror. Think of all those schools of fish that will be equipped with *gasp* weapons of war. Terms like "coral reef destruction" and "aggressive fish" will take on new meaning.

edit on 11/29/2017 by JBurns because: Had to edit my moderately-witty quip



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns


Laws that govern our privacy for one, I don't have time to look it all up now, but surely you are aware that our rights are slowly being eroded away little by little.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

I'm in full agreement that it's both unconstitutional and a step too far.

It will be a while yet before the "Reefer Madness" believing politicians, attorneys general and law enforcement crowd is gone. I can't see this ever happening in Alaska, however we have a couple of old school "Reefer Madness" folks still in power and still very pissed off that a Conservative State would make it legal.

It's crossed the Left / Right line, so I suspect the Fed's in the end will stay out of it to favor States Rights. I'd imagine there will be a lot of push back against Hawaii from it's own legal medicinal users with national support for their plight.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


Oh, yes.. of course!


I am against the massive intrusion by NSA and its sister agencies into our private data. I am equally disturbed by the proliferation of intelligence collection technology, and its use in the commercial sector as well against consumers.

I am a huge fan of encryption technologies, including signal/TOR and believe BTC will overthrow the established banking cartel order.

I couldn't agree with you more. And I feel guns are a great way to defend ourselves in an age fraught with risk and danger, with increasingly sophisticated adversaries standing in opposition to our freedom, liberty and self-determination.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I wish you lot were consistent with your outrage.

Laws to screw us little people are enacted all the time and you guys are happy about it, but as soon as they come for your guns it's the end of the world.

This is why we are being screwed over, wake up to it already.



This isn't actually about guns, though. It's about attacking people in order to deter the use of a medicinal plant that has been proven to work more effectively on chronic illnesses than any of the poison Big Pharma peddles, without dangerous side effects that make even more medication necessary and without the risk of chemical addiction...and about punishing those who do use it.

They can't force people to stop using an herb in lieu of chemicals, so they'll simply use their favorite tactic to cause trouble for them: hit em in the unalienable rights. And they know going after the guns will cause maximum uproar. They already know how many people out there are using medical Cannabis, because they're registered. As are gun owners. I'm betting the correlation between those two demographics is pretty high.

People who truly think this has anything to do with guns are simply taking the bait. This is about the drug industry and Cannabis stealing all the regular customers away from the poisons they've been pushing on the unwitting masses for so long. It's spiteful, childish retaliation.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join