• 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.

THE LAST CHANCE To Get National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Passed.

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,237
Location
here nc
I have no desire for the feds to give anyone any sort of permission to carry. My goal is for the feds to tell the states to stop un-Constitutionally requiring permission to carry. With the right language, a national reciprocity bill wouldn't replace state carry laws. It would nullify them.

Ideally, however, the U.S. Supreme Court would get off their butts and start enforcing the Constitution as it was written, namely, by clearly stating state carry permits, magazine capacities, and similar "restrictions" are precisely the infringements which our Constitution through our Second Amendment expressly prohibits.
Since9, your pipe dream about our inept national legislators being able to put together a legislation firearm initiative(s) ‘with the right language,’ let alone pass it through both legislative bodies, get the signature of the President is astonishing. Our legislative bodies are still arguing over Hillary & Donald’s past escapades and yet again, cannot even initiate financial initiative(s) to run the federal government, darn since9, one inbound representative by their own ‘woe is me’ self admission cannot finance her own living quarters in DC, you want them to facilitate firearm initiatives using the ‘right language’?

Yet you wish these same national legislative body to initiate a federal mandate which would nullify ALL State’s sovereign right of self goverance, humm shades of rule our early country endured under the King’s rule!

Could kinda make good folk wonder whatcha smoking in your pipe since9?

As for an ideal situation...the USSC is just following the same inept mentality as the other two branches.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,422
Location
Florida
So since9, regarding your quote, completely out of context from a ‘12 NC op-ed media piece about secessionist mentality & without attribution per se, could you perhaps enlighten us which specific STATES are being contractually defined by the term “among the several states”?

Further, there are numerous instances states ‘ignore’ Federal statutory mandates with impunity, for example - the legalization of marijuana! Another is the states/cities setting up ‘refugee’ areas! Yes those in Fed land thumped the chests but, it didn’t change a thing at the state level, now did it?
I don't see the power to regulate cannabis in the scope of power vested in the federal government. That's most definitely a State issue.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,237
Location
here nc
I don't see the power to regulate cannabis in the scope of power vested in the federal government. That's most definitely a State issue.
Uh, hammer6, last i checked possession & use of marijuana is still on the Fed’s illicit substance list and therefore considered illegal across this great nation. That the US AG has issued official directive(s) stating those State(s) who have chosen to decriminalize and allow their citizens & visitors to use it won’t be prosecuted under Federal laws is meaningless per se.

That stated by the AG, the DoJ has mandated Fed laws governing financial statutory will be enforced regarding the proceeds from the illicit substance cannot be put into Federal Banking channels! [most recent cite: https://www.brookings.edu/research/banking-regulations-create-mess-for-marijuana-industry-banks-and-law-enforcement/ ]

Further, the ATF Form 4473 still has a question [11e] which states, quote
Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside. Unquote.

Which means those good citizens in those States which decriminalize possession/use of marijuana who partake is using said substance can’t buy firearms without lying, huh!

Humm, seems the Fed’s still have a firm grip on the State’s cojones doesn’t it hammer6?
 

357SigFan

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
148
Location
STL MO, USA
Uh, hammer6, last i checked possession & use of marijuana is still on the Fed’s illicit substance list and therefore considered illegal across this great nation. That the US AG has issued official directive(s) stating those State(s) who have chosen to decriminalize and allow their citizens & visitors to use it won’t be prosecuted under Federal laws is meaningless per se.

That stated by the AG, the DoJ has mandated Fed laws governing financial statutory will be enforced regarding the proceeds from the illicit substance cannot be put into Federal Banking channels! [most recent cite: https://www.brookings.edu/research/banking-regulations-create-mess-for-marijuana-industry-banks-and-law-enforcement/ ]

Further, the ATF Form 4473 still has a question [11e] which states, quote
Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside. Unquote.

Which means those good citizens in those States which decriminalize possession/use of marijuana who partake is using said substance can’t buy firearms without lying, huh!

Humm, seems the Fed’s still have a firm grip on the State’s cojones doesn’t it hammer6?
Yes - however, like their infringement on the 2nd amendment, that doesn't mean they have the legitimate authority to do so - they just decided to do so - just like with firearms laws. Just because there are federal laws saying you can't do this or that doesn't mean that those laws are truly LEGAL.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,422
Location
Florida
Uh, hammer6, last i checked possession & use of marijuana is still on the Fed’s illicit substance list and therefore considered illegal across this great nation. That the US AG has issued official directive(s) stating those State(s) who have chosen to decriminalize and allow their citizens & visitors to use it won’t be prosecuted under Federal laws is meaningless per se.

That stated by the AG, the DoJ has mandated Fed laws governing financial statutory will be enforced regarding the proceeds from the illicit substance cannot be put into Federal Banking channels! [most recent cite: https://www.brookings.edu/research/banking-regulations-create-mess-for-marijuana-industry-banks-and-law-enforcement/ ]

Further, the ATF Form 4473 still has a question [11e] which states, quote
Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside. Unquote.

Which means those good citizens in those States which decriminalize possession/use of marijuana who partake is using said substance can’t buy firearms without lying, huh!

Humm, seems the Fed’s still have a firm grip on the State’s cojones doesn’t it hammer6?

Just because someone puts something down on a piece of paper doesn't make it right or wrong. The only reason drugs are illegal is because the government uses that to finance DEA and CBP. And most police stations and sheriff's offices around the nation wouldn't have anything to do if they weren't "fighting crime" and getting the "evil drugs" off the street. I understand there are federal laws about it, but like the federal laws that infringe on gun rights, I don't believe they have the authority to do anything about it.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,422
Location
Florida
Yes - however, like their infringement on the 2nd amendment, that doesn't mean they have the legitimate authority to do so - they just decided to do so - just like with firearms laws. Just because there are federal laws saying you can't do this or that doesn't mean that those laws are truly LEGAL.

or MORAL or JUST
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,237
Location
here nc
Just because someone puts something down on a piece of paper doesn't make it right or wrong. The only reason drugs are illegal is because the government uses that to finance DEA and CBP. And most police stations and sheriff's offices around the nation wouldn't have anything to do if they weren't "fighting crime" and getting the "evil drugs" off the street. I understand there are federal laws about it, but like the federal laws that infringe on gun rights, I don't believe they have the authority to do anything about it.
Alas, hammer6, these federal substance or ATF’s 4473 completion statutates, right/wrong or morally/ethically just...will, if caught by the nice Fed or State or Local constabulary, could/might/will result, depending on your locale, result in a felony which means you as a citizen no longer have cause to worry about the 2nd amendment infringements, now will ya?

Now if marijuana is legal in your particular locale and you partake in it’s use, so be it, that is your right, but that pesky little concept of lying on a Federal form...eh

Now I do not personally care how you have justified it in your pee-picking brain to disregard those Fed/State statutes, just do not anticipate an iota of empathy from me if/when you are caught and run through the judicial gauntlet where you spend gaggles of money defending yourself instead of new firearms.

Just like the revenue statutes, the war on drug statutes is engrained in ou country’s culture...do not like them...push to change them not flaunt them in ignoring them when the do not suit your purpose.
 

357SigFan

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
148
Location
STL MO, USA
or MORAL or JUST
Slight tangent

Right - The really immoral AND unjust part about marijuana being classified as a schedule 1 drug is that as a schedule 1, it's considered to have no legitimate medicinal value and/or be highly addictive - two things that marijuana is NOT. Real research hasn't been able to be done with it due to its schedule 1 classification, but based on what info has been coming out where it's been made legal, it seems to have VERY legitimate medicinal value - I watched an Allman report a bit back where a guy was talking about it and he was literally read his last rights - he had stage 4 cancer and the doctors said get your stuff in order because you have months left. He wouldn't accept that and got on a heavy cannabis regimen and after a period of time (I don't recall how long) not only was the cancer GONE, it also put his MS into remission. It's so immoral that the pharmaceutical companies get to prolong peoples suffering with their 'cancer treatments', which if you survive them, odds are good you'll have 'some other' cancer pop up down the road. There's enough out there to suggest that marijuana may well be that 'miracle drug', but real research can't be done effectively because it's classified as schedule 1, and you know the pharmaceutical companies want to keep it there and will spend all kinds of money to lobby that it stays there. THAT's immoral.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,237
Location
here nc
Slight tangent

Right - The really immoral AND unjust part about marijuana being classified as a schedule 1 drug is that as a schedule 1, it's considered to have no legitimate medicinal value and/or be highly addictive - two things that marijuana is NOT. Real research hasn't been able to be done with it due to its schedule 1 classification, but based on what info has been coming out where it's been made legal, it seems to have VERY legitimate medicinal value - I watched an Allman report a bit back where a guy was talking about it and he was literally read his last rights - he had stage 4 cancer and the doctors said get your stuff in order because you have months left. He wouldn't accept that and got on a heavy cannabis regimen and after a period of time (I don't recall how long) not only was the cancer GONE, it also put his MS into remission. It's so immoral that the pharmaceutical companies get to prolong peoples suffering with their 'cancer treatments', which if you survive them, odds are good you'll have 'some other' cancer pop up down the road. There's enough out there to suggest that marijuana may well be that 'miracle drug', but real research can't be done effectively because it's classified as schedule 1, and you know the pharmaceutical companies want to keep it there and will spend all kinds of money to lobby that it stays there. THAT's immoral.
Alas, 357, et al., sorry to burst the urban legend(s) bubble, but there is no prohibition on Schedule 1 classified substances being used in legitimate research study(ies)!

In fact promising research with LSD is beginning to show positive promising treatment for those appropriately diagnosed with true PTSD and other neurologic MH issues.

Further, years worth of studies as well as current ongoing Marijuana studies have definitively shown the ‘harmless substance’ has a significant adverse affect on those young [< 18ish] smoker’s developing brains which ‘could/may/will’ lead to MH issues in their adulthood and possibly development of mid/late life neuropathology.

Finally, no scare tactics, but effective and legitimately, sanctioned studies whose results have been duplicated
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,422
Location
Florida
Now I do not personally care how you have justified it in your pee-picking brain to disregard those Fed/State statutes,
Isn't this a forum for discussion? Or are you more concerned with attacking me personally than having intelligent discourse?
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,237
Location
here nc
Isn't this a forum for discussion? Or are you more concerned with attacking me personally than having intelligent discourse?
Sorry hammer6, but the discussion centered on this country’s citizens ILLEGAL use of controlled substances, your initial stance was:

I don't see the power to regulate cannabis in the scope of power vested in the federal government. That's most definitely a State issue.
Then you reiterated,
Just because someone puts something down on a piece of paper doesn't make it right or wrong. Snipped...

I understand there are federal laws about it, but like the federal laws that infringe on gun rights, I don't believe they have the authority to do anything about it.
So now you feel derrière hurt cuz i stated, quote: Now I do not personally care how you have justified it in your pee-picking brain to disregard those Fed/State statutes, just do not anticipate an iota of empathy from me if/when you are caught and run through the judicial gauntlet where you spend gaggles of money defending yourself instead of new firearms. Unquote.

Let me point out something which you might have forgotten during your presumed intelligent discourse ~ forum rule 15, which states,

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

Please understand hammer6 while i might empathize, I cannot cuz i truly didn’t reach out and publicly attack you for your presumed intelligent discourse regarding federal statutes on illegal use of banned substances on a public firearm forum!
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,422
Location
Florida
Sorry hammer6, but the discussion centered on this country’s citizens ILLEGAL use of controlled substances, your initial stance was:



Then you reiterated,

So now you feel derrière hurt cuz i stated, quote: Now I do not personally care how you have justified it in your pee-picking brain to disregard those Fed/State statutes, just do not anticipate an iota of empathy from me if/when you are caught and run through the judicial gauntlet where you spend gaggles of money defending yourself instead of new firearms. Unquote.

Let me point out something which you might have forgotten during your presumed intelligent discourse ~ forum rule 15, which states,

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

Please understand hammer6 while i might empathize, I cannot cuz i truly didn’t reach out and publicly attack you for your presumed intelligent discourse regarding federal statutes on illegal use of banned substances on a public firearm forum!

So what's your point, big guy?
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
The only reason drugs are illegal is because the government uses that to finance DEA and CBP.
So... What's your favorite conspiracy theory forums? Do they never mention the highly addictive nature, both physically and psychologically, of many of the worst drugs?

And most police stations and sheriff's offices around the nation wouldn't have anything to do if they weren't "fighting crime" and getting the "evil drugs" off the street.
Yes, a lot of crime relates to drugs. Making drugs illegal, however, doesn't stop the crime, no matter how many times potheads jump up and down in various message forums claiming otherwise. Crime in Colorado, for example:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/marijuana-responsible-colorado-crime-increase/

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/20/us/colorado-marijuana-and-crime/index.html

I understand there are federal laws about it, but like the federal laws that infringe on gun rights, I don't believe they have the authority to do anything about it.
I vehemently disagree. So does Congress, the President, and SCOTUS.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,237
Location
here nc
So... snipppppp...

Yes, a lot of crime relates to drugs. Making drugs illegal, however, doesn't stop the crime, no matter how many times potheads jump up and down in various message forums claiming otherwise. Crime in Colorado, for example:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/marijuana-responsible-colorado-crime-increase/

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/20/us/colorado-marijuana-and-crime/index.html

Snipppp....
Once again, citing newspeek nonsense based strictly on wibbly wobbly timey wimey statistical fallacies, as both articles clearly state CNN’s
Hickenlooper is skeptical that legal weed is to blame for increasing the homeless population.
"We're trying to get data on it. That's a difficult one to measure," he said.

The lack of solid evidence one way or another weighs on Hickenlooper, who can point to other things that have changed since legalization on January 1, 2014 -- like an economic hot streak -- without being able to say exactly what impact that has had.

SNOPES’
But while it correctly notes that homicides went up by 14.7 percent in the state in 2015 compared to 2014, the CBI’s findings make no mention of the drug.

The district attorney also suggested that Pueblo’s state-high homicide rate (11.1 killings per 100,000 residents) was linked to marijuana legalization. But local police attributed the recent increase in local homicides (13 per year in 2014 and 2015) to a combination of lower staff levels and an “explosion” in the use of opioids like black-tar heroin.

...department officials reportedly also cited a higher population and low police staffing as factors that contributed to the crime increase.

Since9 outstanding to see the adage, Lies, d*mn lies, and statistics is still a viable and living parable in today’s wibbly wobbly timey wimey existence!
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,422
Location
Florida
So... What's your favorite conspiracy theory forums? Do they never mention the highly addictive nature, both physically and psychologically, of many of the worst drugs?



Yes, a lot of crime relates to drugs. Making drugs illegal, however, doesn't stop the crime, no matter how many times potheads jump up and down in various message forums claiming otherwise. Crime in Colorado, for example:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/marijuana-responsible-colorado-crime-increase/

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/20/us/colorado-marijuana-and-crime/index.html



I vehemently disagree. So does Congress, the President, and SCOTUS.

So then I guess you're okay with government infringing on your rights, even though it's explicitly written in our founding documents that they can NOT do anything (2A). Show me where in our founding documents the power is given to the almighty government to be the arbitrary decision maker on what YOU or I or ANYBODY else can put into our bodies if what we do does not impede the liberty of someone else?

you don't have to like or agree with drug use- it certainly can and does destroy peoples' lives, but that's the same argument people make for infringing on gun rights: you're just changing the subject of the discourse.
 

OC Freedom

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2014
Messages
646
Location
ADA County, ID
So then I guess you're okay with government infringing on your rights, even though it's explicitly written in our founding documents that they can NOT do anything (2A). Show me where in our founding documents the power is given to the almighty government to be the arbitrary decision maker on what YOU or I or ANYBODY else can put into our bodies if what we do does not impede the liberty of someone else?

you don't have to like or agree with drug use- it certainly can and does destroy peoples' lives, but that's the same argument people make for infringing on gun rights: you're just changing the subject of the discourse.
100% agree!
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,131
Location
White Oak Plantation
So then I guess you're okay with government infringing on your rights, even though it's explicitly written in our founding documents that they can NOT do anything (2A). Show me where in our founding documents the power is given to the almighty government to be the arbitrary decision maker on what YOU or I or ANYBODY else can put into our bodies if what we do does not impede the liberty of someone else?

you don't have to like or agree with drug use- it certainly can and does destroy peoples' lives, but that's the same argument people make for infringing on gun rights: you're just changing the subject of the discourse.
Uh...it's call "the vote." We The People gave our elected representatives the power(s). I though you knew that. You don't like what our elected representatives are doing, where legislation is concerned, work to remove them from office via the ballot box. This is the mechanism the founding documents provide us to gain a redress from nitwits and their nitwittery.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
4,900
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Uh...it's call "the vote." We The People gave our elected representatives the power(s). I though you knew that. You don't like what our elected representatives are doing, where legislation is concerned, work to remove them from office via the ballot box. This is the mechanism the founding documents provide us to gain a redress from nitwits and their nitwittery.
The ballot box is the only method to procure change? Apparently you"re reading a different document than I am.
 
Top