Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   If you use marijuana legally for recreation or medicinal purposes, you're federally prohibited from owning firearms. That oughta go over well in Montana, where weed just became legal   (montanafreepress.org) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

1782 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Jan 2022 at 8:05 AM (16 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



129 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-01-24 11:34:17 PM  
Technically you are only Federally prohibited from buying them, it's a question on the form you have to fill out.

Don't spark up the day you go to the gun shop...
 
2022-01-24 11:41:11 PM  
Back when I was an arms dealer if I saw your weed card, saw your other paraphernalia, or if you stunk to high heavens of weed or booze I turned down the sale.

I've got nothing against weed but the federal laws are nothing to fark with as a buyer or seller.
 
2022-01-24 11:59:02 PM  
I don't need a gun because all that anxiety is gone
 
2022-01-24 11:59:29 PM  
Plenty of western US Sheriffs, even in blue states, are anti-weed. Some won't even hand out concealed-carry permits.

And oddly enough some of those same Sheriffs are stringent anti-vaxxers, and hate mandates, especially the federal ones. Go figure.
 
2022-01-25 12:00:17 AM  
Err won't hand out permits to people who have medical cards for purchase. I'm not talking growers.
 
2022-01-25 12:26:24 AM  
Oh trust me, it's not the weed that prohibits me from owning a firearm.
 
2022-01-25 4:29:04 AM  
At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.
 
2022-01-25 6:06:28 AM  
Not about to own a firearm or re-start smoking weed but, ummm, is this racist? Is this a law designed by the same people who call joints "jazz cigarettes"? Is this on par with the California ban on open carry which dates back to the days when Black people started open carrying?

Don't get me wrong, the less people that own guns the better, but surely it's much, much smarter to target the non-weed-smokers before the weed-smokers?
 
2022-01-25 6:38:45 AM  

Aussie_As: Not about to own a firearm or re-start smoking weed but, ummm, is this racist? Is this a law designed by the same people who call joints "jazz cigarettes"? Is this on par with the California ban on open carry which dates back to the days when Black people started open carrying?

Don't get me wrong, the less people that own guns the better, but surely it's much, much smarter to target the non-weed-smokers before the weed-smokers?


So the origins of the weed ban in general is 100% klan hooded racist based in white people fears about races mixing with their womenfolk. It was also at that point a literal ditchweed and hard to make a profit from unlike the more cultured and taxed tobacco and alcohols.

As far as gun purchases restricting people who use illegal substances from firearms purchases that's the gun control act of 1968.

The "modern" system of NICS through the FBI launched in 98 after the Brady bill was passed.

Guns in America are a right. Weed smokers, buyers, and growers are law breakers in the eyes of the feds no matter what the state's opinion about it is. I'm on the hook for any sales I did for 20 years and while I don't care about who uses weed, I'm certainly not going to pay big fines, and possible prison time for some other idiots pot habit.
 
2022-01-25 6:49:13 AM  
In a civilized society, weed use would be a prerequisite
 
2022-01-25 7:04:01 AM  

Garza and the Supermutants: At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.


"Illegalizing pot?" Yeah, good job. Nice post. Next time go back to bed instead of posting at 5am with no coffee.
 
2022-01-25 7:13:52 AM  
Yeah - I wonder how many people have popped a squat on that here in Alaska where we're allowed to grow our own as well as buy.
 
2022-01-25 8:07:25 AM  
You'll just have to settle for shooting stuff while being drunk off your ass.
 
2022-01-25 8:11:17 AM  

Garza and the Supermutants: At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.


Obviously you meant legalizing pot...

But democrats are too stupid to push this through before the midterms, or they are willfully going to lose the midterms just to keep the country under distress because most politicians are trash.

There are a handful of good ones.
 
2022-01-25 8:11:22 AM  

Kat09tails: Back when I was an arms dealer if I saw your weed card, saw your other paraphernalia, or if you stunk to high heavens of weed or booze I turned down the sale.

I've got nothing against weed but the federal laws are nothing to fark with as a buyer or seller.


When that nice political candidate made a campaign video advocating marijuana legalization while smoking weed, my post commented that he can't buy a gun now, but farkers didn't seem to care.

It's a big deal. Kids today don't care but it's not a good idea to take pictures of videos of oneself drinking/smoking/etc. Even holding a cigarette doesn't look good 10 years later.
 
2022-01-25 8:12:05 AM  
That's fantastic news.  I also wish they'd start prosecuting the combination of booze and firearms.  Only sober people should ever pull a trigger.
 
2022-01-25 8:12:19 AM  

Garza and the Supermutants: Garza and the Supermutants: At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.

"Illegalizing pot?" Yeah, good job. Nice post. Next time go back to bed instead of posting at 5am with no coffee.


Seriously  That Garza guy sounds like a real asshole when he's tired.
 
2022-01-25 8:12:24 AM  
I own several firearms. I have only filled out that form once.

/am not currently addicted to illegal marijuanas
 
2022-01-25 8:14:40 AM  
An armed society is a polite society.  But a stones society will invite you in and give you some cookies, and you could play Mario Kart if you wanted, but there's only water out of the the tap and some warm Diet Pepsis.  Which society would you rather have?
 
2022-01-25 8:15:44 AM  
Did not know, not that it affects me in either case.
 
2022-01-25 8:18:03 AM  
That sounds like one of those racist dog whistle laws wherein they are trying to prevent black people from owning guns because they are the ones who smoke the wacky tobacky.
 
2022-01-25 8:18:17 AM  

vudukungfu: In a civilized society, weed use would be a prerequisite


No.
 
2022-01-25 8:18:43 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 8:20:53 AM  
Schedule I
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote.


And yet....


36 states
A total of 36 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands have approved comprehensive, publicly available medical marijuana/cannabis programs.



When over half the states have said it has medicinal use, how the heck can it stay scheduled as something that has no accepted medicinal use?

I know, I know, our federal government is idiotic about this.
 
2022-01-25 8:23:55 AM  
Yeah, that is a bullschit law. It would be better suited to alcohol users.
 
2022-01-25 8:27:42 AM  
The question is whether you're an "unlawful user" or "addicted". As long as you don't get high before going to the gun shop, you're arguably not an unlawful user (you were an unlawful user yesterday and perhaps later today, but not at that moment) and you're not addicted because you've never sucked dick for weed. At least that is my bad legal take, but doubt anyone is actually getting prosecuted for this anyway.
 
2022-01-25 8:35:59 AM  
Like many asinine laws, I expect the Feds will soon start to take action on revoking this as marijuana use becomes more and more openly socially acceptable among middle class white people.
 
2022-01-25 8:36:23 AM  

GanjSmokr: Schedule I
Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote.

And yet....


36 states
A total of 36 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands have approved comprehensive, publicly available medical marijuana/cannabis programs.


When over half the states have said it has medicinal use, how the heck can it stay scheduled as something that has no accepted medicinal use?

I know, I know, our federal government is idiotic about this.


I have two friends with cancer. One in a legal state the other not. Both deserve to have their symptoms eased as their lives wind down. And both are but the friend in the not legal state depends on the group of friends to provide sone edibles/oils. It shouldn't be that difficult or "illegal" to do so.
 
2022-01-25 8:37:05 AM  

GanjSmokr: I know, I know, our federal government is idiotic about this.



Well, no... they were incredibly smart about this.  It was never about drugs or their abuse - it was about excuses to attack and jail political enemies.  Between the Palmer raids and the war on drugs - there is a very good reason there is no actual left in the USA, it lost the war before it even knew it was under sttack.
 
2022-01-25 8:38:13 AM  
Not only are you prohibited from buying firearms, you're also prohibited from buying ammunition.

18 U.S. Code § 922:

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person-

(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act
 
2022-01-25 8:40:25 AM  
So, I'm assuming that pulling out your gun license for ID at the weed shop is not a good idea.
 
2022-01-25 8:42:04 AM  

Aussie_As: Not about to own a firearm or re-start smoking weed but, ummm, is this racist? Is this a law designed by the same people who call joints "jazz cigarettes"? Is this on par with the California ban on open carry which dates back to the days when Black people started open carrying?

Don't get me wrong, the less people that own guns the better, but surely it's much, much smarter to target the non-weed-smokers before the weed-smokers?


Exactly, how about enforcing the existing laws against real threats such as:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 8:46:12 AM  

El_Dan: The question is whether you're an "unlawful user" or "addicted". As long as you don't get high before going to the gun shop, you're arguably not an unlawful user (you were an unlawful user yesterday and perhaps later today, but not at that moment) and you're not addicted because you've never sucked dick for weed. At least that is my bad legal take, but doubt anyone is actually getting prosecuted for this anyway.


According to PA State Police, if you have your weed card you are a habitual user of an intoxicating substance. That dqs you from purchasing or owning guns.

/ which is why many people keep their guns legal and have their neighbor use their card to get them weed
 
2022-01-25 8:46:17 AM  

Garza and the Supermutants: Garza and the Supermutants: At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.

"Illegalizing pot?" Yeah, good job. Nice post. Next time go back to bed instead of posting at 5am with no coffee.


He's high as fark
 
2022-01-25 8:50:28 AM  
Infringement?
 
2022-01-25 8:51:02 AM  

RasIanI: So, I'm assuming that pulling out your gun license for ID at the weed shop is not a good idea.


That's fine.  Problem starts when you pull out your weed card at the gun store.
 
2022-01-25 8:52:34 AM  
I have seen Reefer Madness.  I know how dangerous people hyped up on the marijuanas can be and I certainly do not want them in possession of deadly weapons.
 
2022-01-25 8:55:18 AM  

Garza and the Supermutants: At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.


Which means it won't happen because Turtle will not give the Democratic Party a win, and the Democrat Party is too feeble and incompetent to take a win on their own.

Oh, yeah, and Joe would veto it because Joe is a farking republican when it comes to weed.
 
2022-01-25 8:57:55 AM  
none of those laws were ever meant for wypipo.
 
2022-01-25 8:58:37 AM  
So... does this mean the NRA will become pro-marijuana?
 
2022-01-25 8:58:53 AM  

I hereby demand that I be given a Fark account: Garza and the Supermutants: At this point, illegalizing pot at the federal level might have enough support to get 60 votes in the Senate, and would be good for a nice bump in Biden's and other Dem's approval ratings going into the mid-terms. Plus it would be fun to watch the Fox crew twist themselves in knots trying to oppose it.

Which means it won't happen because Turtle will not give the Democratic Party a win, and the Democrat Party is too feeble and incompetent to take a win on their own.

Oh, yeah, and Joe would veto it because Joe is a farking republican when it comes to weed.


Maybe someone should point out how much gravy the credit card companies are missing out on.
 
2022-01-25 9:00:25 AM  

DrD'isInfotainment: Yeah, that is a bullschit law. It would be better suited to alcohol users.


One can be a raging chronic alcoholic and be allowed to buy all the guns one can afford. There are houses out in the county here where the yards are full of dead cars, old televisions, garbage cans full of empty beer bottles, and the kids are being sent to school with empty stomachs in ratty clothing that smells like cat pee and old shoes wrapped in duck tape. But there are 30-40 guns in the place and enough ammunition to keep them warm for weeks so I suppose the kids are safe.
 
2022-01-25 9:02:34 AM  

Aussie_As: Not about to own a firearm or re-start smoking weed but, ummm, is this racist? Is this a law designed by the same people who call joints "jazz cigarettes"? Is this on par with the California ban on open carry which dates back to the days when Black people started open carrying?



Well, it's not like marijuana is singled out. It's any prohibited drug use. You can get denied if you get arrested for something and have someone else's prescription for Ambien in your pocket and it ends up on your record.

So, making MJ federally illegal is racist, yes, but denying gun purchases on the basis of MJ use is just in line with how drugs are treated in general when it comes to buying a gun.
 
2022-01-25 9:03:40 AM  

DrD'isInfotainment: Yeah, that is a bullschit law. It would be better suited to alcohol users.


^^^^THIS^^^^

Since forever
 
2022-01-25 9:05:07 AM  

Ishkur: That sounds like one of those racist dog whistle laws wherein they are trying to prevent black people from owning guns because they are the ones who smoke the wacky tobacky.


1930s hysteria and false-science about "jazz cigarettes" and The Lascivious Negro corruptin' the white wimmins, and also the easily-influenced layabout Mexican, is pretty much why it was outlawed in the first place.
 
2022-01-25 9:05:50 AM  

Deathfrogg: DrD'isInfotainment: Yeah, that is a bullschit law. It would be better suited to alcohol users.

One can be a raging chronic alcoholic and be allowed to buy all the guns one can afford. There are houses out in the county here where the yards are full of dead cars, old televisions, garbage cans full of empty beer bottles, and the kids are being sent to school with empty stomachs in ratty clothing that smells like cat pee and old shoes wrapped in duck tape. But there are 30-40 guns in the place and enough ammunition to keep them warm for weeks so I suppose the kids are safe.


Sad but accurate.
 
2022-01-25 9:07:22 AM  
If the cops don't care & the politicians don't care, then nobody cares.

Cited Source: Virginia.
 
2022-01-25 9:20:52 AM  
 
2022-01-25 9:21:26 AM  

Jeff5: Technically you are only Federally prohibited from buying them, it's a question on the form you have to fill out.

Don't spark up the day you go to the gun shop...


and people get really bent up over it. Cold dead hands vs follow the law. You'd be amazed how many people snitch on themselves. People share too much at the DMV and lose their licenses, they get taken off other medication, They go tell their bosses and then go under scrutiny, they answer yes on the gun form.
 
2022-01-25 9:21:39 AM  
It seems to me that the right to bear arms cannot possibly be infringed or limited for this reason, as it has nothing to do with a militia or its regulation.
 
Displayed 50 of 129 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.