- Thread Starter
- #21
Yep they kept me sane and sober with their checks, wouldn't be surprised if they made the same checks on gun owners some day
JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Question 12 on 4473
- Thread Starter Just Jim
- Start date
Yep they kept me sane and sober with their checks, wouldn't be surprised if they made the same checks on gun owners some day
- Messages
- 74
- Reactions
- 70
Can't get away with that after 941 is signed... If you buy a gun new after that, then tell them no, the feds will be asking you where the paperwork is showing that you "legally" transferred the firearm.
- Messages
- 7,053
- Reactions
- 8,761
The Feds say it is illegal and if you answer no then you have falsified a federal document and get a prize. The state says it's legal but now with 941 you can not purchase a firearm without filling out a federal form which you can't legally do.
The state says you can still have a carry permit while smoking but how are you going to get a handgun to carry??????
Now you get a carry permit or lets just say you are at home or hunting/fishing and don't have a permit. You use your handgun to protect/defend yourself and end up in court. You think you have a good case for yourself and the lawyer/cops are on your side as well.
The prosecuting attorney come to find out is a proponent for gun control and is a lifelong buddy of Prozanski or Burdick and holds their same beliefs.
The first question he asks you is do you use recreational marijuana or do you have a medical card. You answer yes you use it recreationally but that it is legal in this state. The second question is where did you buy the firearm you used to defend yourself, you answer a licensed FFL because that is the law. Now he brings out a copy of that form and makes note of where you said no on that form. So now you are painted as a lying gun nut that falsifies federal documents so he can go around killing people like some dirty harry type wannabe. How does your case look now?
So maybe you get off because the jury saw through the BS and your thinking you'll get on with your life. Some guy steps up says he is a fed and you are under arrest for illegally using marijuana and illegally obtaining a firearm.
The state says you can still have a carry permit while smoking but how are you going to get a handgun to carry??????
Now you get a carry permit or lets just say you are at home or hunting/fishing and don't have a permit. You use your handgun to protect/defend yourself and end up in court. You think you have a good case for yourself and the lawyer/cops are on your side as well.
The prosecuting attorney come to find out is a proponent for gun control and is a lifelong buddy of Prozanski or Burdick and holds their same beliefs.
The first question he asks you is do you use recreational marijuana or do you have a medical card. You answer yes you use it recreationally but that it is legal in this state. The second question is where did you buy the firearm you used to defend yourself, you answer a licensed FFL because that is the law. Now he brings out a copy of that form and makes note of where you said no on that form. So now you are painted as a lying gun nut that falsifies federal documents so he can go around killing people like some dirty harry type wannabe. How does your case look now?
So maybe you get off because the jury saw through the BS and your thinking you'll get on with your life. Some guy steps up says he is a fed and you are under arrest for illegally using marijuana and illegally obtaining a firearm.
The med. pot card is what i was thinking of on this. If you have one you are on record with the state, It would be tough to get around that one.
As for commercial random drug tests go i was checked three times in eighteen months. I am my only employee and don't think that is random. I have never failed a drug test.
As for commercial random drug tests go i was checked three times in eighteen months. I am my only employee and don't think that is random. I have never failed a drug test.
- Messages
- 17,471
- Reactions
- 36,483
MJ - all use is unlawful. Medical prescription or not. The FEDS say so.
It is stupid, wrong, outdated, harmful or anything else you might think.
However, it is the current law.
Now what is the likelihood the FEDs will prosecute you?
What happens if you shoot someone after you have been drinking?
There is no question on the form to ask if you are a drunk, or in a re-hab program, or have re-lapsed alcohol abuse.
I don't know - so I am asking - if we do a face to face transfer in Oregon, is a 4473 required?
How about in WA?
Are the state mandated background checks FEDERAL? Or, just the state?
It is stupid, wrong, outdated, harmful or anything else you might think.
However, it is the current law.
Now what is the likelihood the FEDs will prosecute you?
What happens if you shoot someone after you have been drinking?
There is no question on the form to ask if you are a drunk, or in a re-hab program, or have re-lapsed alcohol abuse.
I don't know - so I am asking - if we do a face to face transfer in Oregon, is a 4473 required?
How about in WA?
Are the state mandated background checks FEDERAL? Or, just the state?
- Messages
- 410
- Reactions
- 187
Are you addicted to marijuana ? A yes answer and you can't buy a gun.
States start up state run Marijuana sales and all those buying with credit cards are leaving a record of purchase, at what point do they declare you an addict and you can't have a gun. Don't think the won't use gathered information against you.
First off, it doesn't ask you if you're addicted. Completely different from asking if you use illegal drugs.
Secondly, I read that most pot shops take cash only since banks are unwilling to do business with enterprises the feds find distasteful, so unless something changed, it's all paper records. Therefore, if they don't do plastic, the feds can't monitor your purchases.
- Thread Starter
- #28
Got the blue sheet in front of me right now and question 12 ask "are you an unlawful user of or addicted to , marijuana, ........... etc
Guess you and I look at different forms
Well, I suppose my input would be that there have been over 5 million attempts to buy firearms by felons from FFL's. Only 13 of those have made it to the inside of a courtroom. I'm not suggesting that anyone lie but with those odds.......................
See what I mean?
Or you could just not be a hophead, just sayin........
See what I mean?
Or you could just not be a hophead, just sayin........
- Messages
- 231
- Reactions
- 211
Your approach is wrong. Your one and only answer MUST be "Officer, Respectfully I choose to remain silent". Remember it is your right not to answer any questions and have an attorney present during any questioning.
Any user is Unlawful in the Feds eyes, as they do not recognize any legal use of it period.
- Messages
- 410
- Reactions
- 187
Got the blue sheet in front of me right now and question 12 ask "are you an unlawful user of or addicted to , marijuana, ........... etc
Guess you and I look at different forms
They never let me take a copy of the test home, what makes you so special??!!
- Messages
- 84
- Reactions
- 153
The 9th and 10th Amendment hasn't existed for over 50 years. The magic IOP (Ink On Paper) never matters, as can be evidenced infinite times to show the hypocrisy.
Alice in Wonderland
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
Alice in Wonderland
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
- Messages
- 2,457
- Reactions
- 1,965
- Thread Starter
- #35
By law if you have sold a gun privately using the instant check and the blue sheet you have to keep your copy for a length of time. But I had one new and not filled out to read from.
Anti gun turds have existed almost since the Constitution was written. They turned totally Malignant in the 60's
- Thread Starter
- #37
Ya even when there was only knives and swords they made those they feared cut off the points of their daggers before inviting them to dinner. They fear you will fight back when you figure out what they are doing to you. The big push now with Bloomberg and the other minions means we are getting close to something most will not like.
- Messages
- 410
- Reactions
- 187
- Messages
- 1,110
- Reactions
- 992
Curious to note that they use the word UNLAWFUL .....
Something can be ILLEGAL but NOT UNLAWFUL...
The UCC is the Root of Illegal...then gets Tag Teamed into 18 USC
THIS is worth looking into....
NOTE: In "Oregon AMJUR" it used to state that simply writing the letters "W.P." SHALL SUFFICE....
So if this is a bogus concept, then WHY is it in the Uniform Commercial Code in the first place???????
Folks, we are all Chattel Property belonging to a Corporation AKA: "THE UNITED STATES, INC",
* HAVE BEEN KIDNAPPED INTO IT BY" WILFULL &/ OR IMPLIED CONSENT",
& IT ALL STARTS WITH HAVING CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH....
THAT is what makes us LADENED CARGO ON THE MANIFEST OF THE "GOOD SHIP ADMIRAL"... [ADMIRALTY LAW]
What used to be "UCC 1-207 has been moved to UCC 1-308 to hide it from the public. "
https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308
duckduckgo.com
Something can be ILLEGAL but NOT UNLAWFUL...
The UCC is the Root of Illegal...then gets Tag Teamed into 18 USC
THIS is worth looking into....
NOTE: In "Oregon AMJUR" it used to state that simply writing the letters "W.P." SHALL SUFFICE....
So if this is a bogus concept, then WHY is it in the Uniform Commercial Code in the first place???????
Folks, we are all Chattel Property belonging to a Corporation AKA: "THE UNITED STATES, INC",
* HAVE BEEN KIDNAPPED INTO IT BY" WILFULL &/ OR IMPLIED CONSENT",
& IT ALL STARTS WITH HAVING CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH....
THAT is what makes us LADENED CARGO ON THE MANIFEST OF THE "GOOD SHIP ADMIRAL"... [ADMIRALTY LAW]
What used to be "UCC 1-207 has been moved to UCC 1-308 to hide it from the public. "
§ 1-308. Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.
Primary tabs
(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as "without prejudice," "under protest," or the like are sufficient.https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308
UCC § 1-308. Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.(a) at DuckDuckGo
DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.
Similar threads
