• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Marijuana: our ticket to repeal of all federal gun laws

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,613
Location
I80, USA
With marijuana growing strong support in the states while maintaining strong opposition on the federal level, it's only a matter of time before the fed either repeal prohibition on it or face a serious dust off with the states over it.

With Obama in office, one would assume that repeal of prohibition is more likely. Hopefully that is wrong. Obama has certainly in the past gone hard after marijuana, even the state legal dispensaries. So who knows.

Point is, if the federal persecution of state legal marijuana continues, then the states will need to stand up and so something about it.

This would be the best opportunity to call for the repeal of the commerce clause we may have ever had.

Ergo, we should be teaming up with the marijuana guys to call for a convention with the objective of repealing the commerce clause.

Thoughts?

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
 

BoiledFrogs

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
63
Location
Michigan
I agree absolutely. How are you going to get the gun owners to take off the blinders that the .gov has given them and see this for what it is.

We tend to see potheads in the same false light as antis see us in.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,613
Location
I80, USA
For the most part, I think a lot of gun owners are coming around the idea of legalizing marijuana. It's just the staunch, police state loving, Republican supporters that don't. ;)
 

carsontech

Activist Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2011
Messages
529
Location
Anderson, SC
-Secede from the government at an individual level
-Hold massive civil disobedience "demonstations"
-Ignore the government out of existence

Of course, lots of minds must be opened first.

Is every able body doing their part to chip away at statist mentalities to be able to start planting seeds of peace and freedom?
 
Last edited:

fjpro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
280
Location
North Carolina
Let's Move On!

My thoughts are as follows: Teaming up with the marijuana folks to repeal the commerce clause will be an exercise in futility. If the situation were reversed, do you think the marijuana folks would even consider to team up with us? It won't be two groups combining to be stronger, but in my opinion, becoming weaker. Let's try to get rid of the commerce clause the old fashioned way. It is my opinion that your suggestion would lead to greater frustration on our part and in the process, we would waste valuable resources. Nevertheless, keep making suggestions. The good ones will survive and thrive.
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
The commerce cause will never be repealed. It empowers the fed to do absolutely anything it wants.
I remember when I was younger someone was teaching about some of the uses of this commerce. I truly, honestly thought he was lying. The use of the clause was so obviously used in a way never intended. I thought "people would never allow that".....
 

Baked on Grease

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
629
Location
Sterling, Va.
My thoughts are as follows: Teaming up with the marijuana folks to repeal the commerce clause will be an exercise in futility. If the situation were reversed, do you think the marijuana folks would even consider to team up with us? It won't be two groups combining to be stronger, but in my opinion, becoming weaker. Let's try to get rid of the commerce clause the old fashioned way. It is my opinion that your suggestion would lead to greater frustration on our part and in the process, we would waste valuable resources. Nevertheless, keep making suggestions. The good ones will survive and thrive.

There are many pro-cannabis people that are pro-firearm too. Unfotunately, considering the stigma that's wrongly applied to most pro-cannabis people (regardless if they partake or not, just being pro gets the stigma) makes it difficult to accurately count.

I should hold a poll on /r/trees and see how many pro-gun people respond.

Sent from my SCH-I800 using Tapatalk 2
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
-Secede from the government at an individual level
-Hold massive civil disobedience "demonstations"
-Ignore the government out of existence

Of course, lots of minds must be opened first.

Is every able body doing their part to chip away at statist mentalities to be able to start planting seeds of peace and freedom?

read here to find out what happen to the people chipping away:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...hing-Facebook-posts-lead-to-arrest-psych-eval
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,613
Location
I80, USA
If the situation were reversed, do you think the marijuana folks would even consider to team up with us?
Yes, yes I do. What is the old fashioned way? Through the courts? The courts wont touch it. They've only bastardized it in such a way as to expand the power congress. Remove it through congress? They wont, it gives them all of their power. Only chance is through the states using a convention.

The commerce cause will never be repealed. It empowers the fed to do absolutely anything it wants.
I remember when I was younger someone was teaching about some of the uses of this commerce. I truly, honestly thought he was lying. The use of the clause was so obviously used in a way never intended. I thought "people would never allow that".....
I agree, congress wouldn't dare repeal the commerce clause. The states, on the other hand, have reason to do so. Especially with the states invoking the 10th either to legalize marijuana or get the fed out of guns. The fed is going to ignore this and continue stomping all over the states. Many states hate Obama and the fedgov now. Or atleast Texas does.

I think, with a lot of hard work and effort, we can get the states behind the idea of a constitutional convention to repeal the commerce clause. Remember, states of little to nothing to lose by repealing the commerce clause and a whole lot of power to gain. It will become a lot more apparent when/if their 10th amendment cases are lost.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,925
Location
North Carolina
I have always supported freedom, and that includes the freedom to grow and use hemp. I just have no use for it myself. Almost every pot grower I have known also kept guns, though some of them were progressives. I wonder if they voted for Obama...
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,330
Location
Okanogan Highland
What we really need to repeal is the 16th and 17th amendment. They are where the Federal government got it almost unlimited power.

Prior to these two amendments, the national Government was dependent on the states for it's very existance, after all everything had to be approved by the Senate, and when Senators were appointed by the State legislatures, it was much easier to reign in on a Federal abuse of power. And the 16th amendment had give the Federal Government unlimited access to funds...just follow the money and you will find the power.

The commerce clause was not a bad idea when it was placed in the constitution. It has been it's application that stinks. As originally written, it was supposed to stop individual states from placing special taxes on items that were manufactured/grown in both states. It was a "guaranteed free trade between the states" idea...to PROMOTE trade, not restrict it, and defenately not to be used so the national government could control and restrict trade between the states. All the commerce clause needs is to be tweeked to reitterate that it is to Promote trade, and never to be used by any governmantal entity, to restrict trade.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,169
Location
earth's crust
Groovy idea OP ...

Far out. That's thinking outside the box ... wonder how you accomplished this? :lol:

The war on drugs is lost, transferred to just a war on everybody
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,463
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
Ergo, we should be teaming up with the marijuana guys to call for a convention with the objective of repealing the commerce clause.


Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Jack, it's not the repeal of the commerce clause that we need. It's the correct application of the commerce clause that we need.

It was put there to prevent states from taxing goods being imported from other states. It was also put there to protect transport of goods between states.

For an example; Washington grows some top of the line Medical Marijuana and Florida's medical crop gets wiped out by a hurricane. Now a doctor in Florida needs Marijuana from Washington and so orders, let's say, 20lbs from a grower in Washington. Now, let's say, every state in between Washington and Florida bans even the possession of Marijuana. So the commerce clause comes into effect when the car carrying the 20lbs of marijuana crosses the state line on it's way to Florida. The driver get's stopped somewhere in between Washington and Florida and arrested for the possession of the marijuana. Well the "weed" was to be delivered to Florida and had to pass through all those states that prohibit "weed." Now the federal government is supposed to step in and defend the transport of "weed" from Washington to Florida so long at it was not being sold and/or delivered in any of the states that prohibit "weed."

THAT is the intent of the "commerce clause."
 

Phoenix David

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
606
Location
Glendale, Arizona, USA
The ATF has already declared that marijuana users are prohibited possessors.

The government will be executing the citizens and putting them in mass graves before it gives up the power it has.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,613
Location
I80, USA
Jack, it's not the repeal of the commerce clause that we need. It's the correct application of the commerce clause that we need.

It was put there to prevent states from taxing goods being imported from other states. It was also put there to protect transport of goods between states.

For an example; Washington grows some top of the line Medical Marijuana and Florida's medical crop gets wiped out by a hurricane. Now a doctor in Florida needs Marijuana from Washington and so orders, let's say, 20lbs from a grower in Washington. Now, let's say, every state in between Washington and Florida bans even the possession of Marijuana. So the commerce clause comes into effect when the car carrying the 20lbs of marijuana crosses the state line on it's way to Florida. The driver get's stopped somewhere in between Washington and Florida and arrested for the possession of the marijuana. Well the "weed" was to be delivered to Florida and had to pass through all those states that prohibit "weed." Now the federal government is supposed to step in and defend the transport of "weed" from Washington to Florida so long at it was not being sold and/or delivered in any of the states that prohibit "weed."

THAT is the intent of the "commerce clause."
If we can tear it down, we can rebuild. If we rebuild it, we can rebuild it better than before.

Think of the fed as like a building. A building that is constantly receiving expansions like new wings and stories. The building needs to be condemned, it's a serious safety hazard and parts of it have been crumbling for a long time now. The building needs to be torn down. But that doesn't mean it can't be rebuilt.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,463
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
If we can tear it down, we can rebuild. If we rebuild it, we can rebuild it better than before.

Think of the fed as like a building. A building that is constantly receiving expansions like new wings and stories. The building needs to be condemned, it's a serious safety hazard and parts of it have been crumbling for a long time now. The building needs to be torn down. But that doesn't mean it can't be rebuilt.

Instead of a complete tear down, why not just re-roof the place?

The problem is that the government has been leaking into where it does not belong.

As fun as a civil war might sound, I would rather get this fixed peacefully.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,613
Location
I80, USA
I never said anything about a civil war,I believe the topic of discussion here is a repeal of the commerce clause, which would gut many federal laws.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
 

JDPrice

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
27
Location
Oklahoma
It has always been my opinion/understanding that the federal authority stops at the state line leaving individual states to govern themselves...I know we have allowed them to trample that detail, and the Marijuana issue might open some eyes, but probably just make some squinted...lol, same kind of thing happened with liquor, but as a result about the same time we got the NFA regulations, prohibition ended but Feds still regulate inside the state???
Montana I believe has a bill outlining instate manufacture and sales of firearms, claiming it is off limits to federal regulation and/or taxation, backed by the 10th amendment ???
 

JDPrice

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
27
Location
Oklahoma
I agree with "freedom 1 man", and would like to add the 14th amendment to it, that is what makes us "federal citizens" only residing in our respective states, and subject to federal laws which should not even apply inside of an individual state..
 
Top