CCW and Weed Card?

[wired]

Freedom, weed, etc... Anybody know why the 18th Amendment was needed to make alcohol illegal but, now, almost anything can be made illegal w/o a constitutional amendment?

If the Gov't wants to make weed or personal nuclear weapons illegal, then need a constitutional amendment - otherwise the Gov't violates the 9th and 10th Amendments. [My guess is we can get an amendment for personal nuclear weapons, easily].

Conceptually, each of us have 'natural (aka God-given) rights' to do anything we please as long as we don't violate the rights of others ('reciprocity of rights'). The Gov't can not interfere with anything we do unless the Gov't's defining document (aka The Constitution) gives them explicit authority to interfere.

As it stands, there are 10s of thousands of things that the Gov't bans - they have utterly no business banning anything. The process to ban stuff is well defined - get an amendment approved.

I still have a hard time seeing how fed.gov can claim interstate commerce in marijuana trumps the 10th amendment when they ban the interstate commerce of marijuana.

 

[gozoner]

The bounds of the commerce clause are well abused - for example, forbidding a corn farmer in Iowa from planting corn because it lowers the price of corn crossing a state boundary. But, in this case, the commerce clause has no applicability - somebody in OR can grow weed for themselves in others in OR - never leaves the state. The 'regulation' of weed was never about commerce...

 

[wired]

The bounds of the commerce clause are well abused - for example, forbidding a corn farmer in Iowa from planting corn because it lowers the price of corn crossing a state boundary. But, in this case, the commerce clause has no applicability - somebody in OR can grow weed for themselves in others in OR - never leaves the state. The 'regulation' of weed was never about commerce...

True. I dont see the feds having much standing in regards to the states allowing marijuana sales within their borders. Perhaps in the old days when the government just did whatever they wanted and no one said anything they got by with it just fine. Now, with states having AG's willing to fight the feds in court we might see some significant changes.

 

[RicInOR]

Booze sales plunge in states with legal weed (and fewer people use hard drugs) | Metro News

Alcohol sales plunge in states with legal weed (and fewer people use hard drugs)

 

[wired]

Booze sales plunge in states with legal weed (and fewer people use hard drugs) | Metro News

Alcohol sales plunge in states with legal weed (and fewer people use hard drugs)

Well there you go. Intrastate weed sales affect interstate alcohol sales so the 10th amendment is null and void.

Groan.

 

[Mecanik]

If marijuana smokers worked as hard to protect the 2nd amendment as they do to smoke their weed we wouldn't be having any trouble defeating gun control legislation.

 

[wired]

If marijuana smokers worked as hard to protect the 2nd amendment as they do to smoke their weed we wouldn't be having any trouble defeating gun control legislation.

Using an example of a group of people who , without due process, have been completely stripped of their 2nd amendment rights doesn't sound ironic to you?

 

[4Freedom]

How about arresting criminals for doing real crimes and stop turning gun owners , pot smokers and all these other people who are not criminals into criminals. In addition, to ruining the lives of people who are arrested and now turning them into criminal offenders who will have trouble getting jobs, housing, etc, we also put a considerable amount of strain on the taxpayers who have to spend lots of money keeping these people in prison, paying for attorneys, court fees, law enforcement , etc. These resources could be used in better places than imprisoning pot smokers and gun owners.

Our government needs to stop locking up gun owners, pot smokers, etc...

What we are becoming is a Fascist Bureaucratic Police State instead of a Constitutional Republic that promotes freedom, liberty and protect the well-being and rights of each person.

If arresting, imprisoning and ruining the lives of pot smokers or gun owners is suppose to protect their lives and make them better, how come it only seems to have the opposite effect? I could even expand upon this and go into our country's ludicrous and oppressive child support, alimony and other type of laws. For example, if a father cannot afford his child support payments they can arrest and imprison him and then charge him with a felony. Now, here is the question, if he is a arrested and now charged as a felon, losing all his rights, because he is struggling to make the payments, how will he now as a felon be able to make future child support payments since he will probably not be able to get a good job?

Our country is becoming a police state and these laws are not about protecting people from harm, but rather controlling the population and turning them into helpless and subservient sheep. Anyone who thinks otherwise is being naive. Our government, such as the gun grabbers, are well aware that our citizens have 2nd Amendment Rights. As well, our government is well aware marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes and has many great medical benefits. However, they don't care, since this is about money, power, politics and these politicians answer to people with deep pockets.

 

[4Freedom]

And, for those , who wonder why these unconstitutional laws are on the books, labeling marijuana a deadly Schedule I drug, it has much more to do with the funding for federal agencies such as the DEA, rather than to do with protecting AMericans from the deadly effects of Marijuana. Since science, otherwise proves the classification of marijuana, grossly inaccurate, there is nothing ethical or legal about this drug classification. Anti-Marijuana operations and DEA departments such as the Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program bring in lots of funding to the DEA and other federal law enforcement agencies. If marijuana was to be legalized, in addition to hampering the profits of the pharmaceutical companies, the DEA would face serious budget cuts that could affect the funding of this agency and could result in job cuts, etc. I understand busting and imprisoning Americans is good business for the feds, but they are both empowering drug cartels and turning otherwise, law-abiding Americans into criminals in the process..

How the DEA Profits off the War on Drugs - ATTN:

 

[RicInOR]

Germans forced to choose between medicinal marijuana and guns

A German hunter's appeal for the reinstatement of his gun ownership card and hunting license despite being a long-term medical marijuana user was dismissed by a Bavarian court Wednesday.

 

[DirectDrive]

CCW and Weed Card?


1) Lie
2) Quit weed
3) Quit guns

 

[wired]

CCW and Weed Card?


1) Lie
2) Quit weed
3) Quit guns

In that order

 

[billdeserthills]

If marijuana smokers worked as hard to protect the 2nd amendment as they do to smoke their weed we wouldn't be having any trouble defeating gun control legislation.

Unfortunately most weed users have a liberal leaning, but this is only because historically the dems have supported legalization. This could be easily changed, especially if Pres Trump were to make sessions stfu about his threats to pot use--Our pres did say that weed should be a 'states right' pre-election...
Can't someone make the elves take sessions back?

 

[billdeserthills]

CCW and Weed Card?


1) Lie
2) Quit weed
3) Quit guns

1) Move to AZ
2) Obtain medical mj card
3) Get your ccw

My brother got his ccw here recently and he already had a medical card from years before--Anyhow You don't need a ccw in AZ to carry, it's a Constitutional Carry state

 

[DirectDrive]

1) Move to AZ
2) Obtain medical mj card
3) Get your ccw

My brother got his ccw here recently and he already had a medical card from years before--Anyhow You don't need a ccw in AZ to carry, it's a Constitutional Carry state

Hopefully that continues unabated.
BUT, you never know when the Federalis might try to move in and throw their weight around.

 

[billdeserthills]

Hopefully that continues unabated.
BUT, you never know when the Federalis might try to move in and throw their weight around.

Gonna get messy if feds do try putting the genie back in the bottle--that
particular genie wasn't ever particularly well stoppered in the past, either

 

[Mecanik]

Regardless of the laws it seems completely irresponsible for anyone to think that they should habitually smoke weed and own a firearm. Same goes for an alcoholic. I personally refuse to sell anything to or shoot with or associate with anyone who engages in such activities. The criminal use of firearms connected to drug use or alcohol is over 90%. To think that you should have access to firearms in that condition day after day is only asking for trouble. In my opinion you need to choose one or the other but not both. I feel little sympathy for someone who gets arrested for felony weed possession and loses their rights to own a firearm. Sometimes having the RIGHT to do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it. It's not worth it.

 

[wired]

It seems completely irresponsible for anyone to think that they should habitually smoke weed and own a firearm. Same goes for an alcoholic. I personally refuse to sell anything or shoot with or associate with anyone who engages in such activities. The criminal use of firearms connected to drug use or alcohol is over 90%.

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have a problem with?

People who are drunk should not handle firearms. People smoking weed dont go out and do much. They just want to chill on the couch. Even so people who are stoned should not handle firearms whilst stoned. Owning a firearm is a different story. You arent stoned or drunk why are you being penalized for something you do occasionally? If you partake put away the guns. Simple as that.

 

[Mecanik]

If you partake put away the guns.

So who gets the keys to the gun safe during this time of planned irresponsible behaviour.

 

[wired]

Ever hear of a concept called personal responsibility?