Posted on 01/25/2014 8:28:25 AM PST by TurboZamboni
The Chicago Tribune has reported that Illinois regulators have proposed new rules that would require users employing the state’s new medical marijuana law to give up their right to own a gun, even if they already have a state-issued firearms identification card or concealed carry license.
Those of you who have filled out a 4473 form lately will recall that “unlawful users” of marijuana are disqualified from buying a gun, so it seems likely that state officials are trying to harmonize regulations with federal law. That’s ironic, of course, since federal law makes no provision for medical marijuana.
NRA is taking no position on the regulations, and that’s probably smart. It is, however, hard not to point out that the President recently stated his opinion that marijuana was no worse than alcohol. If that’s the case, then why should cancer or glaucoma sufferers who use this natural remedy be denied their rights? Hmm?
(Excerpt) Read more at shotgunnews.com ...
because gun pose more problems for tyrants than weed or alcohol.
“If that’s the case, then why should cancer or glaucoma sufferers who use this natural remedy be denied their rights? Hmm?”
Big lie right there.
Medical dope is given to anyone for anything.
It is used by the same stoners who used it always.
Wit doctor they get a card because they have insomnia or headaches or pain that allows them to buy the dispensary dope.
It’s a scam and always has been.
One of the ONLY trends I agree with is decriminalization of Marijuana laws.
The courts are clogged with stupid people willing to risk criminal prosecution to get it...
I do not agree with SMOKING it, but I dont agree with people getting drunk either
Witt doctor dope they get a card because they have insomnia or headaches or pain that allows them to buy the dispensary dope.
It takes nothing to get medical marijuana.
bang a gong,get it on,bang or bong...
Agreed.
Clearheaded gun owners present a far greater threat to the regime than stoned-out dopers. H***, the govt should be passing out free dope along with ObamaPhones if control is their intent.
But seriously, would you want to be downrange of somebody aiming a gun who had glaucoma?....../s
We know someone who got prescribed medical marijuana for persistent headaches. He got into an accident sometime later while on the job. Since he was working, he had to take a blood test. When it showed drug use he was fired on the spot. He had signed an agreement upon taking the job that, among other things, he would not use drugs. He’d never thought about that until he was fired.
| Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 | Receipts & Pledges to-date: $22,143 | |||
|
||||
| Woo hoo!! And the first 26% is in!! Thank you all very much!! | ||||
After looking into the matter, I've come to the conclusion that the criminalization is itself unlawful.
First, there is no amendment to allow the regulation of drugs like there was with alcohol.
Second, the legal-justification given stems from the regulation of interstate commerce, which is the same clause as foreign commerce; for the federal government to declare the level of control of commerce within the states on commerce in foreign countries would be considered (a) laughable, or (b) an act of war.
Third, the justifications themselves have come to very illogical conclusions: that the interstate commerce clause allows congress to regulate drugs grown at home which were never sold and thus never impacted commerce.
The War on Drugs seems to boil down to I'm the authority, do what I say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.