Marijuana Use

[Olds]

I have two perspectives. As a police officer, I always believed that pot should have been made legal. Why? Because I have dealt with more bad decisions (violent and otherwise) that came out of a liquor bottle than ever came out of a bong. If a guy is sitting home doing bong hits, and he has a game console, a Big Gulp, and a bag of Doritos...he's not leaving the house to be a problem for anyone. If he does happen to leave, then he's on his skateboard or BMX bike (at 35 years old) to go get more Doritos. Second, I never went to a DV call that started with "The wife and I were getting high and decided to kill one another". Sell it, tax it like alcohol, and remove the impetus for the violence that goes along with higher level distribution and trafficking.

As a father, I wouldn't want my kids messing with it. Both my sons are officers now, and they were never users. My daughter is 13, and she is a Girl Scout, and total straight laced kid. Thank God. Playing the averages, one of my kids should have been a complete ********...I got lucky.

My wife, who is an MD, is a supporter of medical marijuana use...especially for cancer patients. The patients with cancer she has dealt with who smoke, or use edibles, have a better appetite and are able to eat while on chemo, and their level of physical pain is often attenuated to a great degree.

What I specifically DON'T believe is that recreational use should in any way abrogate your Second Amendment rights. Why? Refer back to more dumb decisions coming from a liquor bottle. I have dealt with more alcohol related violence in my career than I care to try to remember. Billy Bob gets drunk, gets a case of the ass, and the stupidity begins then it's off to the races. Why some people advocate that it be legal to carry a gun into a bar while consuming alcohol is beyond me. At the same time, carrying a gun while high is also beyond me....but, given the two, I'd rather deal with a smoker than a drinker any day. It's easy to use the Jedi mind trick on a smoker.

BUT...of course....the feds have their own ideas about state's rights. And yet...I think it's funny how so many people scream about how the feds should, in essence, trample state's rights as it applies to forcing one state to honor another state's CCW/CPL, yet want the state's to stay hands off on weed legalization, or other issues where federal authority contradicts a state's laws. (Yes, I am a total supporter of national reciprocity, just think it's funny how so many folks want it both ways).

Well said, sir.

One slight correction though about CPL holders and places that serve alcohol. The suggested changes would only be to carry in those establishments. Not carry while consuming alcohol. If a CPL holder wanted to drink, they would still need to disarm from my understanding.

[Ruger]

You say that like they weren't doing raids already... They were, they were just doing them on people who weren't paying the tax man off.
The show "The Profit" had a special this week on california growers. There was a lot of anger from people who had been doing it for years and dodging state police (or had gone to prison and lost everything), but now it's totally legal as long as they pay a buttload of money for licensing and taxes.
There was also a lot of talk about money flowing out of the cities/state that should be getting taxed, and how they're focusing on the unlicensed folks now.

I'm well aware that they continued to "raid" But under the previous administration they weren't pushed to do so. Sessions is simply reminding them that they have the ability to ruin and destroy the lives of people that he deems undesirable.

[scrapinby]

Why some people advocate that it be legal to carry a gun into a bar while consuming alcohol is beyond me.

While I agree with almost everything in your post, I disagree with this. I don't know a single person that has advocated being able to carry while under the influence. People have advocated to allow carrying into places that serve alcohol - but that is intended for people that are not consuming alcohol. It is already illegal to carry while having a BAC of .02 or above. Nobody is advocating changing that law.

[JasonJ]

I was actually wondering about this a few weeks ago, I have a friend of mine who is also an MI resident with a medical marijuana card, he seemed to believe he could not legally purchase a firearm because of it. My initial impression was he could since he was not "illegally" using it. This seems to confirm that although sounds like that may or may not change soon.

If you read the parenthetical note next to that question the 4473, the Feds do not differentiate between a medical MJ user and one using or possessing illegally. Federally, it is still illegal.. and as such, a Federal check and eval is going to say you can't purchase a firearm because of that.

That being said, if the people want marijuana legal, they need to lobby their reps and senators to change the federal law... end this for all and make it a States Rights issue. That's where I'd like its legality decided.

[JasonJ]

I have two perspectives. As a police officer, I always believed that pot should have been made legal. Why? Because I have dealt with more bad decisions (violent and otherwise) that came out of a liquor bottle than ever came out of a bong. If a guy is sitting home doing bong hits, and he has a game console, a Big Gulp, and a bag of Doritos...he's not leaving the house to be a problem for anyone. If he does happen to leave, then he's on his skateboard or BMX bike (at 35 years old) to go get more Doritos. Second, I never went to a DV call that started with "The wife and I were getting high and decided to kill one another". Sell it, tax it like alcohol, and remove the impetus for the violence that goes along with higher level distribution and trafficking.

As a father, I wouldn't want my kids messing with it. Both my sons are officers now, and they were never users. My daughter is 13, and she is a Girl Scout, and total straight laced kid. Thank God. Playing the averages, one of my kids should have been a complete ********...I got lucky.

My wife, who is an MD, is a supporter of medical marijuana use...especially for cancer patients. The patients with cancer she has dealt with who smoke, or use edibles, have a better appetite and are able to eat while on chemo, and their level of physical pain is often attenuated to a great degree.

What I specifically DON'T believe is that recreational use should in any way abrogate your Second Amendment rights. Why? Refer back to more dumb decisions coming from a liquor bottle. I have dealt with more alcohol related violence in my career than I care to try to remember. Billy Bob gets drunk, gets a case of the ass, and the stupidity begins then it's off to the races. Why some people advocate that it be legal to carry a gun into a bar while consuming alcohol is beyond me. At the same time, carrying a gun while high is also beyond me....but, given the two, I'd rather deal with a smoker than a drinker any day. It's easy to use the Jedi mind trick on a smoker.

BUT...of course....the feds have their own ideas about state's rights. And yet...I think it's funny how so many people scream about how the feds should, in essence, trample state's rights as it applies to forcing one state to honor another state's CCW/CPL, yet want the state's to stay hands off on weed legalization, or other issues where federal authority contradicts a state's laws. (Yes, I am a total supporter of national reciprocity, just think it's funny how so many folks want it both ways).

Wow, I can't both agree with nor "like" a post more than that one as it relates to this topic.

So long as a MM/recreation smoker isn't behind the wheel, or doing anything to endanger the rest of us... let them stay at home playing video games or banging their gf with the hand in the chip bag. I don't care... I see little to no difference between weed and alcohol as far as the effects it has on people. EXCEPT that drunks can be real *******s and stoners just act goofy. But the minute that stoner decides to holster a firearm, or drive someplace... all bets are off man, now you are a serious risk to the rest of us; people have been accidentally killed by someone high on weed just heading out for some White Castle or Taco Bell.

Keep your stoned ass home and enjoy, and we'll all be good to go.

[Ol` Joe]

JMO but I suspect the law wont be picking up pot smokers, but it gets them a excuse to start cross referencing CPLs to people with MM cards as example. Or maybe other "markers" as a way to go after "illegal gun owners".

[steve77]

And it's working...

I know people with medical issues that marijuana may be able to help alleviate. Despite this, they have yet to venture down this path in fear of exactly what you are saying; loss of gun rights. So they are left at the hands of big pharma and the toxic garbage they push.

Basically, for those people, there is a natural alternative but you must first decide if your gun rights are worth it. Oh, you want opioids instead? You can keep your rights if you just want synthetic heroine...And they wonder why there is a heroine "epidemic".

MAYBE, if we pushed more pot as medicine then some of this other garbage, crime rates would go down since we aren't making prescription dope fiends whose insurance is going to dry up forcing them to street drugs and the daily costs to support such habits. You know, like less dope fiends might equal less crimes aimed at scrounging up dope money.

This is so far beyond despicable of our government to do to the people. Especially when the only side effects are: happy, hungry, horny, and sleepy.

Much of your statement describes me. I had several near fatal reactions(Stevens Johnson Syndrome or SJS) attributed to Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory/NSAID drugs. Now my options for my chronic pain caused by my Auto-immune disease are extremely limited. I smoked weed in my younger days, recreationally. I would gladly use it again for pain control instead of the prescription narcotics that I am stuck with now. But I am not willing to mix drug and weapons charges at a federal level. So I choose to use synthetic drugs legally by prescription to protect my gun rights.

[DrScaryGuy]

While I agree with almost everything in your post, I disagree with this. I don't know a single person that has advocated being able to carry while under the influence. People have advocated to allow carrying into places that serve alcohol - but that is intended for people that are not consuming alcohol. It is already illegal to carry while having a BAC of .02 or above. Nobody is advocating changing that law.

While I agree with almost everything in your post, I disagree with this. It is illegal to carry CONCEALED while having a BAC of .02 or above.
Carrying/possessing a pistol that is not concealed is only a crime at .08
This makes sense somehow.

[dirtmcgirt76239]

BUT...of course....the feds have their own ideas about state's rights. And yet...I think it's funny how so many people scream about how the feds should, in essence, trample state's rights as it applies to forcing one state to honor another state's CCW/CPL, yet want the state's to stay hands off on weed legalization, or other issues where federal authority contradicts a state's laws. (Yes, I am a total supporter of national reciprocity, just think it's funny how so many folks want it both ways).

CPL and CCW are no different than a drivers license.

Would you like to only be able to drive in certain states ?

The federal laws are not contradictiong state weed laws, the state weed laws do not make it legal at the federal level.

[dwcopple]

So as a CPL holder, would it be wise to NOT pursue a MMC then?