Skip to comments.Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights
Posted on 12/20/2011 6:30:01 PM PST by neverdem
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to prohibit patients from protecting themselves.
If you are a medical marijuana patient in one of the 16 states (plus the District of Columbia) that allow for it, youve got reason to believe lately that the government has it in for you.
Youve got federal raids on the places where you can conveniently buy your medicine, the governor of Arizona trying to overturn in court her citizens choice to institute a medical marijuana system, and Michigans attorney general trying to make life as hard as he can for those using the system his states voters approved by 63 percent in 2008. And while it isnt directly the governments fault, doctors are taking people off liver transplant waiting lists for using medical pot.
It isnt just that the government on both the federal and state level doesnt want you to be able to legally and conveniently obtain your medicine, if that medicine is pot. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) insists you inherently lose a key constitutional right merely by letting your state know you might want to take pot medicinally.
Merely having a state medical marijuana card, BATFE insists, means that you fall afoul of Sect. 922(g) of the federal criminal code (from the 1968 federal Gun Control Act), which says that anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance is basically barred from possessing or receiving guns or ammo (with the bogus assertion that such possession implicates interstate commerce, which courts will pretty much always claim it does).
Nevada licenses medical pot users. Rowan Wilson, a Carson City-area woman who works as a medical technician in residential care homes, believes pot might be useful for her painful menstrual cramps. After going through
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
That can be the only possible explanation.
Because the medical marijuana system of distrubution to "patients" is completely failsafe against any sort of abuse so that only people with a real medical need for the stuff can obtain it. How can the BATFE not see that?
Pot is a federally proscribed drug, so possession and use negates the right to own a firearm. Simple and well known, and predictable to anyone who has ever thought about the realities of sucking pot behind a "prescription."
“Rowan Wilson, a Carson City-area woman who works as a medical technician in residential care homes, believes pot might be useful for her painful menstrual cramps”
This is ridiculous. Is she going to go to work stoned every 28 days?
Did the FDA approve marijuana for any specific medical treatment?
Does anyone have any idea what pharmacuetical companies go through to get a drug approved? After it is approved there are increadible regulations that are strictly enforced during the production process all the way to market.
Any drug produced that was produced in a facility that violated a number of these regulations must be pulled from the market. There are billion dollar lawsuits going on everyday because of missing documents validating processes.
Still, Joe Blow can go and grow. All the community and the doctors know. Write a script, charge a buck, Jow Blow is a wealthy fellow.
How many doctors invest in Joe Blows business I wonder?
There was a thread earlier that stated that over 30% of all U.S. Citizens become arrested at some point by the time they reach the age of 21 (It may have been 18). Over 1% of our population is in prison at any given moment, and per capitz, we have more than 5x the prison population of any other nation on the planet. Besides per capita, we have the largest NUMERICAL prison population on the planet.
The police state is in full swing. I by no means endorse drug use, but I’m going to point out that all of this criminalizing of all behavior is the round about way of gun control. Too many apathetic morons or ignorant touchy feely types thought it was a brilliant idea to hop on the “felons-have-no-rights” bandwagon. Unfortunately they failed to see that it was merely the “first they came for the felons, but I was not a felon” strategy. The average American commits THREE Federal felonies, PER DAY, completely unaware. A felony used to mean that the most heinous of crimes was committed, now it’s merely a money making racket. Everyone who is an adult is an unprosecuted felon, everyone.
Until everyone fights so that EVERYONE gets ALL of their God given rights, including felons not currently incarcerated/serving a sentence, no one will have them. They’ll continue to be erroded, mark my words.
(P.S. I’m not a felon, before anyone asks)
I"m sure. I believe Pot might be useful to relieve my depression when the Browns lose another close game. Happens about as regularly as Rowan's menstrual cramps. If this bimbo can get high when she's pms-ing why can't I get high because I'm in a bad mood?
The medicinal devices sold for inhalation of the medicine were decorated with evil laughing clowns wearing jester hats and Oakland Raiders memorabilia. For straight bustin' ya wig up, yo.
Last time before that I ever went into a clinic, it was years earlier for physical therapy after a hospital stay and the place smelled like disinfecting alcohol and had 10 month old 'Highlights' and 'People' magazines in the lobby.
Boy, clinics sure have changed!
What do you want to bet, she would suddenly start menstruating 4 times a month?
"Officer, I have a prescription. It's for my menstrual cramps." "Lady, I pulled you over two weeks ago and you said you were menstruating then too. You need to go back to the doctor and have him prescribe some potassium to clot that wound. Otherwise, you's gonna bleed to death."
Should they be able to drive and operate heavy machinery while “taking pot” too?
I forget, where do my rights start?
You’re an unprosecuted felon, and so am I....
BTW The FDA has approved marinol as a medical thc preparation. I knew a guy who took it for appetite while dealing with cancer. Yes he got rather high. He was a FFL dealer also, btw.
Read it carefully. Anyone “addicted” (read regularly taking) a controlled substance... Like Tylenol #3? Adderall? It doesn’t limit the proscrption to ILLEGAL drugs. How many of you saying, “Yeah, those dope smokers shouldn’t have rights to arms” take a legal controlled substance?
Part of our prison population problem is freedom. But a larger part is the prison habitat. You know why Singapore is statistically one of the safest places (for crime) to be on the planet? An individual rarely commits a crime more than once.
If you break down the statistics by State, some magical things start to show up. When you break them down by ehtnicity, some more interesting things show up. When you start to study the cultural shift in America and the egregious influense urban and Latino cultures have had on youth in poverty along with our “no responsibility” and “no pride or honor” attitude (culturally speaking), it is no wonder we have lavish prisons fully populated with healthy happy repeat offenders.
Crime would drop like a rock if they changed the rules about prison overcrowding. If a prisoner had to be shot (executed) everytime a new prisoner was introduced to exceed the occupancy rating, how long before you think overcrowding would stop being an issue?
You take the number one worst offender or the leading prison gang member and you make him wear a yellow jump suit. It means he is the next to be executed when the court sends them another prisoner (regardless of how long he’s been in there). Save the jump suit. Wash it, leave the bullet holes, and give it to the next guy. This way, you kill a whole lot of birds with one stone.
Suddenly you end up with a prison full of cub scouts for fear of the yellow suit.
Just an idea......
Well, when you put it THAT way... :-)
(P.S. Im not a felon, before anyone asks)
You just said everyone commits 3 felonies a day. Are you immobile?
Sounds like a great reason to end the whole “medical marijuana” falacy. Two problems solved.
If you (not just you) have served your time, you should have every constitutional right every other citizen enjoys, including but not limited to the right to keep and bear arms. If an ex con can't be trusted with a gun he should still be on the inside of a prison.
I am liking the way you think.
Let over crowding work out its own solution.
Surely you're not suggesting the BATFE would use a bureaucratic loophole like that to start disarming people taking prescribed pills? We can trust them on this, it's just a bunch of potheads and we don't like them.
Entitled? Is the 2nd Amendment part of the Bill of Entitlements?
>Pot is a federally proscribed drug, so possession and use negates the right to own a firearm.
Is this before a trial? Or should we just scrap the fourth & sixth amendments?
>Simple and well known, and predictable to anyone who has ever thought about the realities of sucking pot behind a "prescription."
I'm not a pot-smoker, never appealed to me, but it is absolutely intolerable what the "Ware on Drugs" has don (and is doing) to the Bill of Rights as-written and as-applied.
If I remember correctly, didn’t Ann Coulter say on the view, that stistically there is not a higher percentage of minorities in the prison population if you account for single parenting. IIRC she said that there may be a greater percentage of black/hispanics than whites, but when you accounted for single parent homes, that the number fell in line. I don’t know the exact phrase, but, I remember reading it on FR. Also, the police state targets those with the least ability to form a defense. You must remember that the conviction rate is considerably higher for minorities than whites. I can guarantee it’s not because they always get the right person when they’re a minority, and mess up on the whites. It’s because the minorities are easier targets for the racket. (Not that there isn’t a propensity to commit a larger percentage of prosecuted crimes, I addressed that above, but I would say that they are much more likely to go to prison innocently than an anglo, because financially speaking, they cannot form an adequate defense).
On another note:
Recently (here locally), there was a woman released from prison after 16 years, because she was wrongfully convicted of murder. The coroner testified (in the exoneration hearing), that police had approached him, and asked him to broaden the time that he said the victim had died. The police had no leads, and just wanted the matter closed. Several witnesses had stated that they had seen the man alive in a restaurant several hours after the police said he was dead (because it was the only time that the woman, who was framed, had no alibi). In the exoneration hearing, the state prosecution said that this could not be considered “new evidence” because they had known that the witnesses said that the man was alive, but had surpressed it from the jurors the first time around.
After the exoneration trial found her innocent the Attorney General wanted to appeal the case because he said that it would set a precedent for other people to get new trials. I have to wonder how many men and women have been political prisoners for the police state racket’s gain.
That having been said, we do need a reform to the criminal (non)justice system. Some whacko got the idea that everyone needs to be locked up. Well, it’s not true. Nor does everyone need to die. In fact, many people have been found wrongfully convicted now that we have DNA testing. So, I’d want to weed out the corruption before I would go so far as to start killing prisoners just to make room. Then, I’d be amenable to sentences that allowed for people to work off/recompense their debt (obviously you cannot pay back something like a rape, murder, etc.). This is a big issue, b ut it’s important to understand that there is no less corruption in the courts than there are in the legislature and executive branch. They are all corrupt, and are all using us to make money.
Trust me, there are plenty of laws and if the masters so desire, they will find one to make you a felon.
>>Read it carefully. Anyone addicted (read regularly taking) a controlled substance... Like Tylenol #3? Adderall? It doesnt limit the proscrption to ILLEGAL drugs.
Water, everyone’s addicted to it.
And the EPA ‘controlls’ it.
Ergo, everyone should be denied the right to keep and bear arms.
Hmmm, so people actually trying to follow the rules—instead of ignoring them—get screwed. Great way to build respect for the law!
Does this rule apply to any prescription drugs? After all, I’m sure that if I asked I would be told that this is a “safety” issue. And many prescription drugs impair their user in some way.
Not that I trust the word of the FDA any more than I do any other federal agency—on any subject. Supporters of RTKBA would be wise to approach this kind of rule with caution; anti-gun nutjobs are not above using federal agencies for their own agenda (look at what they’ve done with CDC in the past).
Obamacare will do it.
Last time I checked, even Snoop Dog doesn’t need pot to stay alive.
midol or .357, Midol or .357, MIDOL or .357!!! chose...
I agree with you whole heartedly. Besides weeding out things that shouldn’t be felons, we also need to recognize that one reason that criminals increase the sevirty of subsequent crimes, is that many make a mistake, and they are put into a hole they can never get out of. So, after one crime (even a relatively minor one), they often can never find work for years and years. Maybe some people think that they shouldn’t, but I’m not one of them.
I know, we’re all sheep for the sheering! That having been said, there’s not much we can change until people get their head out of the sand.
Aspirin could not get approved today, too many side effects (like blood thinning). But it’s grandfathered.
You know, I don’t mind arguing with other FReepers about the drug war. I think there’s room for disagreement on the issue, and I can agree to disagree about it, even though I have a strong opinion.
However, when I see a thread like this where some FReepers are all too willing to forget the basic conservative principles about the Constitution just because they don’t like “those damned hippies”, it really saddens me.
Rights are rights, and when it comes to the big ones, like self-defense, we don’t derive them from the government, so there is no legitimate action the government can do to take them away. Any action that deprives us of such a right is by default an illegitimate use of government power. We can’t let ourselves forget that due to our subjective feelings, or we are no better than liberals.
Maybe that is the gambit, to have them regulate grandma's chamomile tea.
BTW, marijuana is mentioned by name on the form 4473.
The sheer number and volume of laws is ridiculous, and you’re spot on about their purpose as a path to the police state, whether it was intentional or not. Lawmakers get paid to make laws, they get publicity for their re-election when they pass laws, and they get more croney jobs to hand out to their buddies with every law they have to enforce. So, it doesn’t even take a conspriratioral mindset to conclude that politicians will just keep making laws until everyone is a criminal if nobody stops them, and I think we’re already pass that point.
I’m not sure what we can do about the problem, since it would be much easier to pretty much wipe the slate clean and go back to a minimal set of laws than try to hack through the morass on the books already. The average complacent voter would let the media scare them off of supporting something that radical in a few heartbeats, so I don’t think it will happen. Even if we could get a drastic reduction, we’d also have to pass reform to discourage lawmakers making new laws unnecessarily, and that would be opposed by the entire political machine, of both parties.
It’s almost as if this is a problem inherent in political systems with lawmaking bodies, and the only solution is intermittent revolutions toppling the government and redrafting the law from scratch in order to reset the cycle.
Excellent points, all. I think that the Founders recognized all of these problems (”Tree of liberty”, etc.). You are correct also, in that the average apathetic (wo)man could care less. They all of a sudden get hit by some incident (or a family member, friend, etc), and then they usually wake up.
I think that all laws in the U.S. Congress should be only one page long, and read aloud, in English, on their respective floors, before they can be passed. I also think they should have to happen between say 9-7 ET, and be televised, no 3AM nonsense. I dunno, I guess that nothing is perfect, but there has to be a better way.
And you make a valid point, intentional or unintentional, our freedoms are eroded. I don’t think every politician wants to turn us into a police state, but I have a hard time believing a lot of the current ones in power do not. They’re making sure that everything is illegal, and only the people they want get prosecuted. Compare Wesley Snipes and Barney Frank. Or Anthony Weiner and the town perv, etc. etc.
“Maybe that is the gambit, to have them regulate grandma’s chamomile tea.”
In the last few years there have been many proposals/bills regarding vitamins and supplements, it may only be a matter of time!
That's funny. The psychoactive incredient is mentioned in US Patent, #6,630,507
So, which branch of the government is lying to us? HHS or DEA?
Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia. Nonpsychoactive cannabinoids, such as cannabidoil, are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses useful in the method of the present invention. A particular disclosed class of cannabinoids useful as neuroprotective antioxidants is formula (I) wherein the R group is independently selected from the group consisting of H, CH.sub.3, and COCH.sub.3
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services (Washington, DC)
Regarding the prescription drugs, there are a great many prescription drugs that are doled out every day to Americans that are Schedule 2 or Schedule 3 controlled substances regulated by the DEA. Some of these, like narcotic painkillers, will effect you in almost exactly the same way as Schedule 1 substances like heroin or morphine, that are in the same category as marijuana. A lot of prescription drugs are definitely addictive and widely abused. Even widely used non-narcotic psychiatric drugs like Ritalin are on the schedules, addictive, and can have similar effects to drugs such as methamphetamine. So, your fears about them using this as a backdoor method of gun control sound pretty reasonable to me.
Also, besides this drug restriction, there is the long-standing restriction placed on people with psychiatric problems. Right now, I think you have to have been institutionalized or something for these restrictions to kick in, but is it crazy to think that the government will try to widen that restriction too? Am I paranoid for thinking that the boom in handing out prescription antidepressants to a swathe of the population is a really convenient event for people who would like to ban guns for people who had been just treated for mental issues or prescribed psychiatric medication?
What other drugs would this apply to? Xanax, Prozac, Ritalin? Any of a hundred other mood altering drugs?
It is the recipe for tyranny. When anyone can be charged with a crime everyone has to live in fear. All the police have to do is randomly pick folks up. The smart ones will plead out quickly just to be on to whatever is next.
Given your screen name, what about fins? And teeth?
But those aren't the ones I'd bet most users are after...
“The sheer number and volume of laws is ridiculous, and you’re spot on about their purpose as a path to the police state, whether it was intentional or not. Lawmakers get paid to make laws, they get publicity for their re-election when they pass laws, and they get more croney jobs to hand out to their buddies with every law they have to enforce. So, it doesn’t even take a conspriratioral mindset to conclude that politicians will just keep making laws until everyone is a criminal if nobody stops them, and I think we’re already pass that point....”
And it’s much cheaper than a trip to Jamaica.
I think that’s the way the Nazi’s did it.
In fact, all of them that I know think those who support such interpretation of the law are their mortal enemies.
Both Silberman and Sutton cited Scalia's opinion in 2005 upholding strict federal regulation of marijuana in the case of Angel Raich, a Californian who used home-grown marijuana to relieve her pain. "If Congress could regulate Angel Raich when she grew marijuana on her property for self-consumption," Sutton wrote, "it is difficult to say Congress may not regulate the 50 million Americans who self-finance their medical care."