Schumer: Ban guns for drug-test flunkies

[zeezee]

'If someone admits to a federal official that he or she has used illegal drugs, that information should be sent to the FBI so that person can be disqualified from purchasing a gun, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said today.'

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...flunkies_bLoHQcfL8zCoGC2wrV3cWL#ixzz1BEuN6v9r

Woah, wait a hot dang minute, didn't cliton and bho claim to have used illegal drugs? And they were/are responsible for pulling the trigger on the biggest gun of all, our nukes. Now tell me that makes any sense at f'n all? Another case of hypocrisy from our liberal leaders. PUKE!!!!!

Read More

 

[cowbikinlogger]

Maybe we could fill out the form for the B-ground check twice incase we forgot something or possibly another billion laws to prevent the unpreventable.

 

[Wheeler44]

My question is; what about folks that refuse drug tests? Should they also be allowed (or issued) access to firearms? Portland Police have refused drug testing for quite some time.

How about drinkers? Are they more or less stable than druggies? Should people that have a conviction for drinking and driving be disallowed access to firearms due to their demonstrated lack of respect for the law and lack of concern for the safety of others....

Why do the lawmakers refuse to take the same tests that they require of others?

Inquiring minds want to know.

W44

 

[lesscubes]

Not a fan of this... Weed doesn't exactly turn people into psycho killers, certainly no more so than alcohol. Now, what about the Armed Forces report to NICS when they reject someone for either mental health or substance abuse reasons?

 

[donMiguel]

Of course, they could expand drugs to include alcohol.

So that a DUI or a Drunk/Disorderly or Public Intox show impaired judgement, and grounds to deny possession of a firearm...

Can't assume it is just pot heads who get whacked under these proposed rules.

 

[zeezee]

Not only that but pot is detectable in the blood stream 30 days after one has smoked. Alcohol on the other had dissipates readily, usually in under 12 hours. So one weekend you burn one with your buds, drink a couple cases of beer, a 5th or two of rot gut whiskey and decide to purchase your all time favorite firearm three weeks later and bingo, "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law". Now that is BULL CRAP!

 

[Riot]

lol, I'm actually FOR this...want to play with drugs? Leave the guns at home. All you tards that want Marijuana legalized so badly should be pushing your legislators to have the law changed, not screaming in gun forums on how it sucks that you can't smoke a joint after work (or during, or before, or whenever you want).

 

[Crawler65]

WHAT! So........"I had a poppy seed muffin for breakfast a day or two before a UA at work. I failed the UA as a result. I did not lose my job over it, because my boss is not a tool, but now I can't buy a gun!"
I don't use drugs my self, but I do know a few people who use weed LEGALLY, and illegally, and some from each camp have failed a UA or two over it. Heck, I failed a UA once, don't even know how. I had used no illegal drugs, and re-tested and passed no problem. Nothing came of it with my employer, but if THAT could stop me from buying a pistol legally....................

 

[MrNiceGuy]

All you tards that want Marijuana legalized so badly should be pushing your legislators to have the law changed, not screaming in gun forums on how it sucks that you can't smoke a joint after work (or during, or before, or whenever you want).

Yes, because that's RAMPANT in this thread.


You're an angry drunk, arent you?
I vote no guns for you.

 

[deadeye]

How many people do you think actually check that little box next to the question on the form when buying????? Even with the Oregon card you are still illegally using under federal laws.
If this were to come around you can bet I would become even a louder voice on the subject of school teachers not having to drug test either.

 

[Trlsmn]

lol, I'm actually FOR this...want to play with drugs? Leave the guns at home. All you tards that want Marijuana legalized so badly should be pushing your legislators to have the law changed, not screaming in gun forums on how it sucks that you can't smoke a joint after work (or during, or before, or whenever you want).

So taking away constitutional rights is OK so long as it's not your gun? what's next take away gun rights of people that have declared bankruptcy? How about people with speeding tickets? How about people with..........just so long as they never get to you eh?

You're siding with Shmuck Schumer the #1 enemy of gun rights, frankly I find that contemptible. Don't fraternize with the enemy or I will have to consider you my enemy!

 

[gaijinsamurai]

The majority of American adults have tried marijuana at least once in their life. They should not forfeit their constitutional rights for having done so.

If they are convicted felons, they are already ineligible.

 

[MountainBear]

That's a grand sweeping claim. Have any facts to back that up, or are you just prone to grandiose claims?

I don't know where to sit on this issue. On one hand, I believe in the second amendment. On the other hand, I have experienced too many jack-asses out in the areas where I shoot that are drunk or otherwise impaired. I don't support legislating common sense, but...

 

[Karma]

That's a grand sweeping claim. Have any facts to back that up, or are you just prone to grandiose claims?

I don't know where to sit on this issue. On one hand, I believe in the second amendment. On the other hand, I have experienced too many jack-asses out in the areas where I shoot that are drunk or otherwise impaired. I don't support legislating common sense, but...

There is a big difference between someone trying drugs, and someone that shoots under the influence of drugs. I don't know any adult that has never taken a sip of alcohol. I know a lot of people who have tried pot at one point in time. I don't support anything that makes buying a gun illegal to most Americans. As a matter of fact, "shall not be infringed" pretty much says it all.

 

[SheepDog223]

Shall not be infringed

 

[gaijinsamurai]

Schumer is a snake and enemy to our freedom, plain and simple. Let him have this, and it will just be a way to get his foot in the door.

Eventually, they could include stuff like "people who've gotten speeding tickets. Afterall, would you want someone who can't handle the responsibility of a car having a gun?"

Give in to them, and eventually they'll find a way to get you too......

 

[zeezee]

I guess it comes down to the simple fact that pot is illegal and alcohol isn't. Until, or if and when the laws change, smoking dope is against the law. Now some one claimed they didn't know any adult males who have never tried alcohol or pot, look toward the east in the state of Utah at the Mormons. No caffeine, no alcohol, no illegal drugs, etc. and they live that belief.

But my main point here is not wether you and I have smoked pot or got falling down drunk, it that our government wants to impose this restriction upon us , with the full knowledge that more than one commander in chief, including the current scum bag, have also partaken in hemp. bubblegum for all we know, he has the secret service supply it to him? Ah Ah AH, roll me another bomber please mr secrete service agent. The elite are again trying to impose their laws upon us while at the same time claiming immunity. Does anyone have the proposed amendment being circulated that reads something like this; Congress shall pass no laws that effect the people but do not effect congress?