Here’s a Headline I Never Would Have Thought Of
- Thread starter Lab4Us
- Start date
D
Deleted member
Guest
You’re a stepper. You then cannot buy a firearm literally trading constitutional rights. The whole premise is unconstitutional to testify against oneself being a legal requirement. Move to friggin’ England if you like that. I’m against people doing drugs, but dammit, I do defend constitutional rights on principle.
Blackmesa96
Custom
I understand the philosophical argument here. Until there is a court ruling affirming your position, we are here.
Many of the questions posed on a 4473 are unenforceable. The seller doesn't possess the ability to know if a person intends to sell or dispose of a weapon. Nor do they have knowledge of any other question posed that there isn't record of. Drug use falls into this gray zone.
Last 4473 I completed made it clear that Marijuana use remains illegal at the Federal level. According to that logic, the use of Marijuana disqualifies a person from legally possessing a firearm. It doesn't make any difference whether I have a different opinion regarding that.
If the Fifth amendment argument is a sticking point to someone, many states allow direct person to person sales without a 4473. That would be the way to protect your right if you so desire.
PieterCoetzee
Master Class
D
Deleted member
Guest
Someone who treads on constitutional rights.
Jester560
Professional
What about glaucoma and it's use as a pain reliever?? I have known more than 1 cancer patient that was given Marijuana in the end stages for pain relief and better sleep. Given by a licensed oncologist!
PieterCoetzee
Master Class
Onewolf426
Hellcat
Then you should have no problem with a stoned driver who kills someone or a family while driving getting charged for driving under the influence and vehicular homicide, correct? And, you should have no problem with someone who is smoking marijuana who gets pulled over with a joint in the ashtray getting arrested and their vehicle searched, correct? You should have no problem with being pulled over, and if the officer suspects you have been consuming some form of marijuana, being given a sobriety test and a drug test, correct?
PieterCoetzee
Master Class
Guys, I really dont want to argue about this anymore. This has become like religion, no one seems to want to hear any thoughts that differs from theirs. It used to, people could disagree without name calling. They could have their say and then go back to being neighbors; but not anymore.
last2brake
Custom
I'm surprised that people would limit their awareness by assuming that this is a black-and-white issue.
Let's be pragmatic. Prohibition created organized crime in the 1920s.
Which USA laws have created drug cartels a century later ?
Lab4Us
Professional
To be quite honest, when I posted the article, I thought the discussion would be more about the NRA supporting the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). Never meant for it to be a drug discussion.
There was a time that the NRA would have never thought about (at least publicly) supporting such an organization. I, personally, think there are better gun rights the NRA could focus and spend money on that affect a much bigger population than marijuana users.
Like all the crap new gun laws coming up in Virginia, for instance. Or all the false allegations of “weapons of war”. Or the nonsensical California gun laws. Or all the states that disallow magazines over 10 rounds (or is it 9 rounds and one in the chamber).
There was a time that the NRA would have never thought about (at least publicly) supporting such an organization. I, personally, think there are better gun rights the NRA could focus and spend money on that affect a much bigger population than marijuana users.
Like all the crap new gun laws coming up in Virginia, for instance. Or all the false allegations of “weapons of war”. Or the nonsensical California gun laws. Or all the states that disallow magazines over 10 rounds (or is it 9 rounds and one in the chamber).
D
Deleted member
Guest
Well that’s a jump, I said that I disagree with people doing drugs, but disagree with violating the constitution more so. I think it should absolutely be illegal to drive while high or even hotboxing one’s vehicle. You aren’t even arguing in good faith, blocked!
D
Deleted member
Guest
Because you realized that you’re proposing constitutional rights violations. Man up and own up!
PieterCoetzee
Master Class
HayesGreener
Ronin
It is good that we are passionate about the Constitution and Bill of Rights. But "unconstitutional" is an over used term, kind of like "racist" or "mysoginist" that is so often employed as a shortcut when disagreements arise.
Some actions by government are clearly contrary to the intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Every atorney and law enforcement officer knows where those boundaries are. But much of the controversy exists in the gray areas, and must be contested in the courts. It is important to keep in mind that it took 13 years for the states to ratify the Constitution, and consensus could only be attained by acceptance of the original Bill of Rights. What was, and what was not the intent of the founding fathers have been the source of countless Supreme Court cases ever since. Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land and our best course is legal action through our various organizations.
Some actions by government are clearly contrary to the intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Every atorney and law enforcement officer knows where those boundaries are. But much of the controversy exists in the gray areas, and must be contested in the courts. It is important to keep in mind that it took 13 years for the states to ratify the Constitution, and consensus could only be attained by acceptance of the original Bill of Rights. What was, and what was not the intent of the founding fathers have been the source of countless Supreme Court cases ever since. Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land and our best course is legal action through our various organizations.
D
Deleted member
Guest
The fifth amendment against self-incrimination. Jesus, move to England, you’d fit right in!
PieterCoetzee
Master Class
OK we really arent reading the same constitution. It NOT a violation of the Fifth Amendment or any other right to ask if you are breaking a law. Its NOT a custodial situation, nobody is violating your rights...but since you are so sure exactly what Law School did you attend? What was your LSAT score?
Perhaps youd like to argue about the gold fringe on flags in a court room....
Alcohol has the same effect. The folks in AA, Al Anon, Al Ateen can attest to the devastation of Alcohol. The only difference is, Bourbon is legal. I don't disagree with your points but we tend to dismiss Alcohol in discussions. I will own underage Beer drinking took me to my first joint. I applaud those that grew up from 1960 - to say 1985 and claim to never have burnt one I say, Sure
