Four kids, two adults shot dead near Houston

a reply to: spirited75

So where is the evidence that people are PHYSICALLY being told that they cannot purchase a firearm because they've admitted to smoking pot? If this is going on, surely there is some evidence that is occurring. Or is this just fear mongering?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nope. It is in the Federally provided form to all FFLs, that any person purchasing a firearm must complete.

a reply to: macman

I understand that, but is anyone actually ACTING on those forms and denying people who admit to smoking pot in CO and WA a gun when they buy one? It's one thing to say that the tool exists, but quite another to demonstrate it is being used in the way described.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If the person checks "yes" and/or states that they are, then the transaction will be stopped.

If not, and it comes back, the FFL can get in major trouble.

a reply to: macman

I don't believe that is the case.

a reply to: Krazysh0t



www.google.com... na-card-youve-just-given-the-government-an-excuse-to-come-for-your-guns%2F&ei=RdfGU9qbLsWu8AGls4HYDA&usg=AFQjCNE21aDVsIuXnV5c18MoENvw-FEiHQ&sig2=cwLjG t_p-agC9sVpFvHroQ&bvm=bv.71198958,bs.1,d.cGU

www.google.com... -laws-spell-trouble-for-pot-using-gun-owners-262630831.html&ei=RdfGU9qbLsWu8AGls4HYDA&usg=AFQjCNFwTo2nDzf7C2DIIVnSlid9cUeWwg&sig2=jQNdcGEFYWB56R3VD9FO cg&bvm=bv.71198958,bs.1,d.cGU

www.google.com... t-farago%2Fatf-to-pot-smokers-no-guns-for-you-dude%2F&ei=RdfGU9qbLsWu8AGls4HYDA&usg=AFQjCNFIoyinofjiJ9RUzesTimmpeFGNQg&sig2=8gYOZ7jAayL4NTyg0NsLLQ&bvm =bv.71198958,bs.1,d.cGU

are you incapacitated in some manner or fashion that you cannot research this yourself.

Marijuana is a retardant drug.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

macman is 100 percent indubitably correct.
I used to be an FFL

a reply to: spirited75

What is a retardant drug? I googled that term and nothing came up. Did you just make that term up or something?

By the way. At the most this is an issue that will be hammered out in the courts. Also keep in mind that the FDA is currently looking at reclassifying marijuana's scheduling.

ETA: By the way, thank you for the sources. But don't chastise me for not looking it up. I make a point of not confirming other people's claims. It's not my responsibility to make sure that your claims are correct.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

nevadaguntrustattorney.com...

a reply to: macman

Like I said, this issue is going to be ironed out in the courts. It won't stand as marijuana is further and further legalized. It's just an antiquated law that hasn't been updated to suit the times yet. I don't believe for a second that this will become a tool that the gun grabbers can jump on to take guns away from people. While yes, currently, you get prohibited from buying a gun (I'd lie on the application anyways, but whatever) for using legal marijuana, the conflict between state and federal law is bound to create many lawsuits. The SCOTUS can ignore them for the time being since only two states have recreational use and medical is hard to get if you don't live in a few select states, but that won't last forever. Marijuana is going to be legalized with in the next 20 or so years. The feds just have a terrible track record of updating their laws to suit this.

While i really don't have anything against pot use, I'd still prefer that the guy shooting a gun isn't stoned off his ass.

Kinda, a safety thing.

a reply to: HauntWok

Well seeing as how marijuana gives people a euphoria, couldn't it be reasoned that a pot user would be LESS likely to use a gun? I'd personally rather someone be armed and high rather than drunk and armed. One is currently allowed and the other is taboo. Unfortunately the one that is taboo would result in less injuries and violence than the one that is allowed.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think pot should not be the business of the Govt.

As of right now, it is illegal and the ATF has a document stating that all FFLs will abide by the laws directed by the Fed.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Purely a safety concern. Intoxicated is intoxicated. Guns aren't toys.

Not that i think that pot use should disqualify a person from owning a gun. But I'd rather they not be high.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

looking for peace love and string cheese sounds like the lyrics to a dylan song

marijuana has plenty of blood on it.

the cartel has killed lots of people to keep the corridor open so drugs, including marijuana can continue to pour in from south of the boarder.

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: Krazysh0t

looking for peace love and string cheese sounds like the lyrics to a dylan song

Does it? I made it up to advertise one of if not my favorite bands, String Cheese Incident.

marijuana has plenty of blood on it.

the cartel has killed lots of people to keep the corridor open so drugs, including marijuana can continue to pour in from south of the boarder.

Ok so my question has been answered. I was proved wrong, the pot talk is OT and I won't be discussing it anymore though.

Form 4473 is pointless. The 5th Amendment protects you from self incrimination. Put whatever you want on it.

a reply to: HauntWok


LOL, so what you're telling me is murder didn't happen before gun's were invented 500ish years ago?????

Good theory there Einstein.

Psychopaths are everywhere. Personally I'll take a .45 to the brain anyday rather than go out like poor Lee Rigby.

Lets fix the PROBLEMS, not the symptoms.

a reply to: XTexan

the 4473 is not pointless.

It is inquiring you to self admit to some questions,
that if answered in a certain way (truthfully) would
lead you to be ineligible to purchase a firearm.

it is an attempt to implement several laws and regulations
to restrict felons, mentally ill, and drug addicts from purchasing a weapon.
also aliens and dishonorably discharged service members.