Marijuana Citation and Gun Rights?

[fiddletown]

..How many posters in this thread drink beer, coffee or tea, smoke cigs..

..those are all drugs, well, ...

But they aren't controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act.

1. The federal law regarding persons prohibited from possessing guns because of the use of controlled substances (18 USC 922(g)(3), emphasis added):

   as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
   
   ....
   
   to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce....

   
   
2. The definition of "controlled substance" (21 USC 802(6)):

[nicki]

Moderators, please consider the following suggestion.

To the moderators.

Since California is a "Medical Marijuana" state, then perhaps we should create a "sticky" with the "correct information", not what some of us would like and that even includes me. on guns and marijuana.

The reality is probably a large minority of people on this board have smoked the "demon weed".

The people who will get burnt legally on gun related issues will be people who make inadvertent mistakes.

People are going to make their own choices, but at least let's do something for visitors so that they don't inadvertently get themselves into legal trouble.

Legal trouble will cost you money and if you are lucky, that is what it will cost you. Stupid legal problems can cost you not only your money, but your freedom and your rights as well.

Nicki

[Turbinator]

To the moderators.

Since California is a "Medical Marijuana" state, then perhaps we should create a "sticky" with the "correct information", not what some of us would like and that even includes me. on guns and marijuana.

The reality is probably a large minority of people on this board have smoked the "demon weed".

The people who will get burnt legally on gun related issues will be people who make inadvertent mistakes.

People are going to make their own choices, but at least let's do something for visitors so that they don't inadvertently get themselves into legal trouble.

Legal trouble will cost you money and if you are lucky, that is what it will cost you. Stupid legal problems can cost you not only your money, but your freedom and your rights as well.

Nicki

I'm going to give my opinion on this, and it is only but my own personal opinion and not necessarily the opinion of the site owners or other admins / mods.

I think the info you want to share and promote would best be hosted by a medical marijuana forum or site, not Calguns.

Turby

[Curley Red]

Only thing that needs to be sticky'd is if you use marijuana, then per the feds you are not allowed to own a firearm.


This is one of the many reasons why I prefer state rights or federal rights. A state should be able to do what it wants and not be dictated by the feds.

[mrdd]

However, state rights creates its own set of problems. History has shown that the states do not respect the federal constitution or laws.

Most egregiously this led to the passage of the 14th amendment. And that altered the republic forever.

[nicki]

14th amendment.

However, state rights creates its own set of problems. History has shown that the states do not respect the federal constitution or laws.

Most egregiously this led to the passage of the 14th amendment. And that altered the republic forever.

I agree that the 14th amendment did change our republic, however I don't think that expanding human rights and using the power of the federal government to enforce them isn't necessarily a bad thing.

State's can maintain their rights, what they can't do is subjectively set laws and policies that deny equal rights to people who are in their state.

Of course anyone who supports "State's rights" is an automatic racist who supports slavery and repeal of women's rights according to many far- left Libtards.

The "Commerce Clause" didn't repeal the 9th and 10th amendments although those two amendments currently are on life support.

The feds have used their "Taxing power" and the "Commerce Clause" to make "end runs" around our bill of rights.

Nicki

[mrdd]

I agree that the 14th amendment did change our republic, however I don't think that expanding human rights and using the power of the federal government to enforce them isn't necessarily a bad thing.

State's can maintain their rights, what they can't do is subjectively set laws and policies that deny equal rights to people who are in their state.

Of course anyone who supports "State's rights" is an automatic racist who supports slavery and repeal of women's rights according to many far- left Libtards.

The "Commerce Clause" didn't repeal the 9th and 10th amendments although those two amendments currently are on life support.

The feds have used their "Taxing power" and the "Commerce Clause" to make "end runs" around our bill of rights.

Nicki

I'm not saying it is a bad thing. But it certainly put the shoe on the other foot, and helped lead to the situation we have today - very powerful federal government, relatively weak states. The southern states really did a number on the rights of the states.

My other point about the states is that they still do not respect the federal government in many areas. Medical MJ is one example, it does violate federal law and our treaty obligations.

The fight for our rights as recognized by the 2nd amendment is another. Several of the states, including our own, are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the correct side of the room.