What if I irregularly smoke pot?
Like upside down? Or in a funny hat?
Only can own ARs then
The way the law works currently it’s just a mechanism to remove gun rights from people and to tack on extra bullshit charges to anyone who happens to get caught with a little weed and also owns guns. Sincerely hope they can actually change this law because it is almost entirely used for bullshit.
Wonderful, set precedent that the 2nd amendment is totally subject to the whim of the president. Then let’s flip all of government in 2028 and work on fixing this gun problem once and for all.
i’m all for better gun laws, and I speak as someone who owns multiple and yet still does not trust the 2nd amendment anyway. I think we should be reminding folks that “amendments” don’t mean shit, and we need legit common sense laws.
and a separation of concerns when it comes to what a gov can and cannot do. eg: laws won’t stop ppl from owning guns, but mental health/healthcare WILL stop people from causing harm.
gotta be careful with the wording, because “common sense” has such a broad meaning that it can be used by fascist to distort reality.
true!! i mean logical. my bad.
Watch as the GOP takes away gun rights from a sizable portion of their own pot smoking, 2A glazing base… and none will waiver their support.
Like clockwork, they get mad for all of 3 seconds, then they remember the GOP is leading the genocide against brown people and LGBTQ+ people, then they forget anything happened at all.
It’s already illegal. This is a challenge to restore those rights.
I wish people would read the articles. Weed is already Federally prohibited. The case is an attempt to overturn that.
One of the biggest potheads I know is a right wing trumpet with TONS of guns. The irony would be pretty sweet I gotta say.
I think you’re a little mixed up. It is currently illegal for a regular pot smoker to own guns. The supreme court is looking at potentially getting rid of that restriction. So if they did, I think it would actually reenforce your friend’s love of Trump.
Fuck, I clearly only read the headline and inferred that they’d be looking for an excuse to take guns seat in states where it’s legal (mostly but not all bluer states).
And to add more to this, the plaintiff is from Texas.
Scotus will likely overturn this
I very much doubt it was doing much to help anyway. The rich fuckers who can afford both guns and weed are gonna do it either way.
Aren’t the pot smokers more mellow and less likely to fight/shoot/kill someone. I think drinkers stand a better chance of violence. How about we leave both groups alone. Case closed … next?
I think the issue should be pretty cut and dry. You can drink as often as you want and own guns. You can’t go out shooting while you’re drinking. You should be able to smoke whenever you want as long as you’re not inebriated when you’re shooting.
What does this have to do with legally owning a gun. This isn’t about shooting inebriated. This is about cherry picking one group and castigating them. I have no idea where you go the idea that anyone said it was okay to get high and shoot. That’s a total straw man.
This ridiculous nonsense should and will get the NRA up in arms.
Chill dude, you’re calling out “straw man” like I’m disagreeing with you. I’m saying that the rules should work the same way. There’s no reason people that smoke should be banned from gun ownership, just like people who drink aren’t banned.
I simply replied to your post that didn’t address the topic of pigeonholing pot smokers to segue about people who smoke pot shouldn’t shoot like drinkers can’t shoot. Yes we all agree anyone fucked up shouldn’t be shooting and I really haven’t heard anyone suggesting they should? Especially here so yeah that’s a logical fallacy even if good intentioned.
Wow, you’re a little insufferable
You can’t go out shooting while you’re drinking.
Try telling that to the old farts at the trap range.
I knew one club shooting president who really, really wanted to ban drinking while using any of the ranges. The culture of having a beer while shooting was too entrenched, and the loss of membership numbers from the old guys leaving would have put the club out of business. So it was only banned on the pistol/rifle ranges. Had to leave trap and skeet as they were.
People who regularly smoke weed should not own guns. Neither should anyone else. Sincerely, every developed nation.
If everyone else gets guns, then weed smokers get guns too, otherwise it’s a very convenient way to selectively apply gun restrictions to specific groups of people.
After smoking, I’d be too scared to even look at my gun, let alone use it.
yeah, i agree the disparity is shit. there is no legitimate reason to treat weed smokers differently. if you were to use a gun in self defence, say, i can understand that whether you were impaired at the time might be PART of the legal picture, but that notion should apply evenly to everyone, irrespective of the drug. like you said, it is just another tool for targeted enforcement.
Nah, guns are cool and fun.
Funny thing is, i agree. i used to like going to the range, shooting clay pigeons, etc. handguns are tightly controlled in my country, but i imagine i would like them too if i ever got to use one. i still don’t think just everyone should have one, though, because the societal price is too high to justify.
Seems reasonable.
They can have it once it’s empty.
Well said.
Notice how they don’t go after those who regularly do Ketamine or the Cokeheads sauntering the halls of the WH at any given hour.
Can’t wait to send this to the weed smoking chud I know. Also they gonna throw out Hunter Biden’s criminal conviction?
Weed is already prohibited. The case is about overturning that.
At this point the court will probably do something like “its illegal but only if you’re racial profiling or said said something mean about trump”
ATF form 4473 question 11(e) asks:
Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? [my bold]
Are you. Right at the moment you are checking the box, are you an unlawful user …?
Caffeine and nicotine are stimulants.
Are you … addicted to … any … stimulant … ?
Just so we’re all on the same page, the current status quo is that you cannot buy a firearm if you use pot. This ruling would potentially change that. No, it does not matter if your state has legalized it, or if it’s strictly for medicinal use. The ATF doesn’t care.
It’s rarely enforced, but it’s there.
Ah yes, another spectacular “small government” approach from those Conservatives. “Don’t tread on me, unless I’m brown/queer/leftist then tread all over”
I hope they decide they can. That said the entire corpus of the Roberts court still needs thrown out
“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, LIBTARDS!”
*Terms and conditions apply.Tap for spoiler
Not applicable to blacks, liberals, queers, leftists, women, convicts, or users of the marijuanas. Sincerely, American Taliban, Guardians of Pedophiles.
The case is about overturning an existing restriction, not adding new ones.
