Lynx Defense

Feds Are Relaxing Pot Laws.....Yeah, Right.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Saltyag2010

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Feb 11, 2014
    5,851
    66
    Flour Bluff, America
    That is the "plan" I was referring to. If the Feds were sincere about "decriminalizing" Pot, that schedule ONE narcotic classification would be changed immediately!
    Flash
    I'm waiting for it to happen. God said that all the plants and animals were made for us to use. The Feds said, "well not this one or this one". I'm against prohibition on religious grounds.

    Another thing- the Feds suck.
     

    rushthezeppelin

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Dec 28, 2012
    3,821
    31
    Cedar Park
    Yep. Going to the moon sucked. GPS sucks. I hate the Smithsonians... who needs all that history and why can't they make people pay admission like everywhere else?

    Yep. They suck.

    Free market can do all those things better and cheaper....not the like the Smithsonian is truly free. Just saying I think there are very few things a federal government can do better than the free market, then again I'm just a nutty libertarian so what do I know.
     

    Saltyag2010

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Feb 11, 2014
    5,851
    66
    Flour Bluff, America
    Yep. Going to the moon sucked. GPS sucks. I hate the Smithsonians... who needs all that history and why can't they make people pay admission like everywhere else?

    Yep. They suck.
    Too bad that PRIVATE BUSINESSES don't offer products or services at competitive rates. Too bad INDIVIDUALS don't care about saving or restoring historical items, flags, or equipment.

    The fed does suck. The only thing they're good at is keeping our military, and Obama is trying to weaken them. The laws that they have on firearms, surveillance on its citizens, drugs, and others are very misguided and dumb.
     

    TheDan

    deplorable malcontent scofflaw
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Nov 11, 2008
    27,838
    96
    Austin - Rockdale
    It's called rhodiola rosea. I have absolutely no clue why.
    It says it's for energy and vitality. Seems to me it insinuates it's a natural form of 'speed'.
    Check out ma huang. That stuff is like natural speed. I used it a couple times when I had to transition from 12hr day shifts to mids. An idiot friend of mine decided to take a fist full of them and I found her wandering around the neighborhood out of her mind.
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 5, 2012
    18,591
    96
    HK
    I don't know why you think it's just "a plan"; they've already said that if you use "legal" marijuana, you are federally barred from owning firearms. The ATF said this in 2011, in response to questions of "medicinal marijuana."

    In 2011, the BATFE said this:
    “Any person who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether the state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition,” says Donna Sellers, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

    The relevant law is 18 USC 922(g):

    "(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
    (3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (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."

    A lawsuit was filed in 2011 to challenge the BATFE's position, and last year the court ruled in favor of the ATF.
    https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/nevada/nvdce/2:2011cv01679/83947/49

    Now, the 2011 statement was, IIRC, before the elections that legalized marijuana for non-medicinal purposes in Colorado and Washington, but the underlying reasoning of the ATF's position remains the same. Marijuana is still illegal at the Federal level, whether a State legalizes it or not. It's still illegal at the Federal level, whether the State classifies it as "medicinal" or "recreational."

    Form 4473 (what you fill out when you buy a gun) is a Federal form. And possessing or using marijuana is a Federal crime -- even if it's not a State crime.

    That means that if you fill out form 4473, and you're a marijuana smoker, you have to answer "yes" to question 11 on 4473. And you are banned by federal law from owning firearms. Period.



    Lmao....



    (6) The term "controlled substance" means a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of part B of this subchapter. The term does not include distilled spirits, wine, malt beverges, or tobacco, as those terms are defined or used in subtitle E of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

    Whew....for a minute there I thought alcoholics weren't allowed to own a gun. I'm glad my government thought this through. There's difference between addictions? It's a good addiction if it's taxed????



    (D) any drug which contains any quantity of a substance which the Attorney General, after investigation, has found to have, and by regulation designated as having, a potential for abuse because of its depressant or stimulant effect on the central nervous system or its hallucinogenic effect.



    Lmao.....caffeine could fit that definition. Better check that box on the form. You don't need a gun anyway. Can't shoot properly being all jittery.

    http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/802.htm
     
    Last edited:

    Saltyag2010

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Feb 11, 2014
    5,851
    66
    Flour Bluff, America
    Lmao....



    (6) The term "controlled substance" means a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of part B of this subchapter. The term does not include distilled spirits, wine, malt beverges, or tobacco, as those terms are defined or used in subtitle E of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

    Whew....for a minute there I thought alcoholics weren't allowed to own a gun. I'm glad my government thought this through. There's difference between addictions? It's a good addiction if it's taxed????



    (D) any drug which contains any quantity of a substance which the Attorney General, after investigation, has found to have, and by regulation designated as having, a potential for abuse because of its depressant or stimulant effect on the central nervous system or its hallucinogenic effect.



    Lmao.....caffeine could fit that definition. Better check that box on the form. You don't need a gun anyway. Can't shoot properly being all jittery.

    http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/802.htm
    Yes the Feds suck. Their laws don't make since. They kept their own booze collections during prohibition and watched criminals take power. They don't really have to work and they do whatever they want. Alcoholics can have guns, a guy that smokes weed on Fridays to reflect on a hard weeks work can't. Addicts? Like the ones on refined sugar, dr. Pepper, Oreos, cigarettes, booze, TV, Facebook, energy drinks?

    Our federal gov is a joke.
     

    baboon

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    May 6, 2008
    22,650
    96
    Out here by the lake!
    Before he died, my BIL who lived in Comiepornia looked into getting an RX for weed. 24 years in the Army fucked him up. Back was messed up from jumping down off of tanks. He also was in the oil field fires during the gulf wars.

    What he came to realize was with the card his security clearances would be voided, his employer (DOD) did not except it, he wouldn't be legal to own a gun & if he he wrecked a vehicle & tested positive he would be screwed.
     
    Top Bottom