General

ATF: Marijuana and Firearms Don’t Mix

Much has been written in the comment section of The Shooter’s Log regarding state versus federal laws. So, this article should provide for lively debate. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has issued a clarification to language on ATF Form 4473. The clarification covers the use of marijuana in states that have legalized it for recreational or medicinal use versus federal law. In other words, it may be legal in some states, but it is still unlawful federally.

ctdlogoRed2 On the revised ATF Form 4473, Question 11e reads, “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any other depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug or any other controlled substance?” This caused confusion for some in that marijuana has been “legalized” in some states. However, the ATF is focused on federal, not state, law. To avoid further confusion, the ATF has added the following clarification to question 11e, “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.” The revised ATF Form 4473 will be mandatory for use starting January 16, 2017.

The ATF’s clarification follows a ruling issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit last August. In that decision, the court ruled marijuana card holders at the state (Nevada) level are barred from gun purchases.

Where do you side when it comes to state versus federal law? Should marijuana use be a disqualifier to firearm ownership? Share your answers in the comment section.

[dave]

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (109)

  1. Just make a provision to the federal law that recognizes, at the federal level, any explicit laws that states issue on the matter. Federal gov should respect the states on the matter.

  2. An Interview with Dr. Mechoulam

    Dr. Mechoulam is mentally energetic, kind, and generous. He spoke with David Jay Brown about how he came to discover THC and anandamide, the role that endocannabinoids play in the brain, natural ways to increase the brain’s production of anandamide, and the great potential of cannabinoid-based drugs currently being developed.

    Q: What do you think the functions of anandamide and other endocannabinoids are in the brain?

    Dr. Mechoulam: The endocannabinoid system acts essentially in just about every physiological system that people have looked into, so it appears to be a very central system. Actually, the cannabinoid receptors are found in higher concentrations than any other receptor in the brain, and they are found in very specific areas. They are not found all over, but rather in those places that one would expect them to be—such as areas that have to do with the coordination of movement, emotions, memory, reduction of pain, reward systems, and reproduction. So, I believe that this is a very central and essential system that works together and communicates with many other systems.

    Exercise has been shown to elevate endocannabinoid levels in the brain, and this probably accounts for what jogging enthusiasts refer to as the “runner’s high.”

    Q: Do you think that increasing the amount of natural cannabinoids in the brain has any health benefits, and if so, what are some other ways that you think might increase the brain’s natural production of endocannabinoids?

    Dr. Mechoulam: A good friend of mine was involved in that research. The results were a little bit on the marginal side, not tremendously high.

    They saw a little bit more anandamide than normal. I would have expected much more. There was just this one paper, so people have not gone into that very thoroughly. It’s probably true, but I think that we have to do a little bit more work on that. I talked to Dr. Piomelli, who was one of the people on that paper, and I believe he also thinks one should see a little bit higher levels.

    But there are many ways in which the endocannabinoid levels go up, and this is something quite specific for endocannabinoids. Generally, they are present in very low amounts. They are just not there. If you take a mouse and put it in a very low temperature (around one hundred degrees below zero) the mouse dies, the brain stops functioning immediately, and you’ll find essentially no anandamide.

    The anandamide is formed on demand when needed, and in only those areas that need that particular compound at the moment.
    For example, during pain it will be produced in certain areas. The endocannabinoids are not produced all over, and they will not go into the bloodstream like hormones. They will stay around that particular area where they are supposed to be formed. One of the functions is neuroprotection. Now, I’m speaking about mice because I’m not sure what happens with humans. I’m not working with humans and, obviously, it’s not ethical to do that. If you take a mouse and cause slight damage to the skull of the mouse, or even to the brain, and if you leave the mouse, it will recover within thirty days. But if you look at the brains of the mice, you find that at least one of the endocannabinoids goes up 1,000%, so we thought that maybe they have a neuroprotective role.

    So, we took mice of this type that had been injured, and we injected them with synthetic endocannabinoids—2-AG, the second compound—and we saw that the damage went down very significantly. And there has been a lot of work on that. There has been some excellent work in California by Greenberg,38 and they find the same thing in other models. So, everybody now believes that these compounds play a role in neuroprotection.

    Q: What are your thoughts about using cannabinoids as a treatment to help prevent cancer or retard tumor growth?

    Dr. Mechoulam: There are several groups that have found it effective in reducing tumor growth. This is probably due to the same mechanism as before with the neuroprotection. It’s probably not only neuroprotective; it’s probably a protective agent in general. So, to a certain extent, the endocannabinoid system can be compared with the immune system.

    Now, the immune system obviously guards us against protein effects, viruses, and microbes, but not all damages. So, just as our body protects itself with the immune system against microbes or viruses, it also tries to protect itself with other systems—and the endocannabinoid system is one of them.

    So, I believe that it certainly acts against cancer cells. There is a very important group in Spain that has done some excellent work on that, and they’re actually going into human work now with some cancers found in the brain. We have also done a little bit on that, and there is an Italian group that has done a lot of work on that. So, basically, it seems that this is one of the routes that our body uses to try and protect itself—by acting on cancers using several different mechanisms, not just one.

    Q: Can you talk a little about the research that’s currently going on with cannabinoid analogs and the development of new pharmaceutical drugs, such as in the areas of neuroprotection and pain management?

    Dr. Mechoulam: THC itself is approved in the U.S. by the FDA, and it is used in many other countries for the prevention of vomiting during cancer chemotherapy, and for appetite enhancement. We, and many others, have found that not only THC does that, but also the endocannabinoids. This is one of the main reasons for high endocannabinoid levels during hunger and so on. Now, THC can be used, and is being used, for these two things.39 40

    Sanofi-Synthélabo Recherché in France is doing some interesting work. They have a compound, which is an antagonist of the cannabinoid system, and they have tested it in about 8,000 obese people. They have found that it is extremely useful. Their appetite goes down slowly, as it should, and they lose weight. They plan to introduce the compound in twelve months time, I think. They’re doing a lot of work in the field, and they expect huge sales. [NOTE: This drug, rimonabant, which is now available in the U.S. under the trade name Accomplia, has been authorized in the European Union since June 2006, to be used in combination with diet and exercise to help obese and overweight patients lose weight. Human clinical trials showed an average loss of 10% of bodyweight, plus beneficial improvements in HDL, cholesterol ratios and triglycerides. However, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) has issued warnings that rimonabant should not be used by patients who are severely depressed or taking anti-depressants as it heightens risk of suicide among this group.]

    There are compounds that are being tried by many companies. I think that just yesterday a new mixture of THC and CBD (cannabidiol), which is made by a company in England called G.W. Pharmaceuticals as a spray under the tongue, was approved in Canada. So, they will be marketing it in Canada for the prevention of all kinds of multiple sclerosis effects, and they will probably get it approved in England.

    Here we have several things going. There is a compound which was found to be pretty good for prevention of cognition-lowering after heart surgery. After heart surgery, in some cases, there is some cognition lowering, and we found that it certainly does something to that.

    Initially, we found this same compound was very good in the prevention of brain trauma, but large-scale experiments have not been positive. I’m not sure why. I think that it was a technical mistake, but that’s another thing.

    I’m part of the faculty at the medical school here, and at Hadassah Hospital, and we use THC for a variety of things. It has to be approved in every single case by a committee at the hospital. We have used it for a very wide variety of things. We found it effective in fighting hiccups, for example. You’ll be surprised how if somebody has hiccups constantly for months how terrible it is. And it works fine. We’ve used it for Tourette’s Syndrome, which is a very nasty neurological disease.

    This was based on work by some colleagues in Hannover, Germany.41 It works very well indeed. We’ve tried it in cases of multiple sclerosis. We’ve tried it, obviously, with appetite. We gave it four hundred times to children undergoing cancer chemotherapy in order to prevent them from vomiting, and to help with the terrible situation associated with treating children for cancer and so on.42

    They’re happier, and the families are happier, so we’ve been very glad about it. So, we try it in various diseases, where there is sufficient literature.

    Q: What are some of the new drugs and treatments that you foresee being developed from cannabinoid analogs in the future?

    Dr. Mechoulam: First of all, there are those things that have been approved already, such as for improvement of appetite. That’s good for cancer and AIDS, and is widely used. The other one of course is vomiting. The new drugs, I’m sure, will have to do with neuroprotection, and with certain kinds of pain—neuropathic pain, not acute pain. It doesn’t work with acute pain. It works mostly with neuropathic pain, long-term pain.23 43

    It may also work in the suppression of memory. This is something that I hope we’ll be able to start shortly. There’s something called post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is due to upsetting memories that stay around too long. Normally, when there is trauma, people slowly forget it. This is true for humans, and it’s true for animals. But if the animals do not have an endocannabinoid system, they do not forget bad memories, and this was shown in a paper by a German-Italian group. In collaboration with the Canadian group, we have done some work on that, and in a different model, we have seen the same thing. So, I expect that the endocannabinoid system is not in good shape in those post-traumatic patients, and chances are that it will work in treating them. We are just about to develop a treatment.

    People who have PTSD claim that the only thing that helps them is smoking marijuana, so chances are that cannabinoid treatment may help them.

    Q: You once said that “Whatever THC does, anandamide does as well.” What is the reason that synthetic anandamide isn’t used therapeutically as an alternative THC?

    Dr. Mechoulam: That’s a very touchy subject. Many years ago when insulin was discovered—I think it was in the early 1920s—it was in the clinic within six months. When cortisone was discovered fifty years ago, it was in the clinic within two years, and it became a very successful drug. We discovered anandamide twelve years ago, and it still has never been officially administered to a human. Neither has 2-AG.

    Q: Why is that?

    Dr. Mechoulam: The laws have changed. I cannot give anandamide to a human because the toxicology research is not there, and the toxicology research is millions of dollars to do. So somebody has to pay for that. I’ve asked the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) many times.

    Q: But isn’t it an endogenous substance?

    Dr. Mechoulam: Yes, but the law is that even a human endogenous substance has to be tested for toxicology and all these things. So, I have asked them; I begged them actually, please do it—because a company will not, and obviously an academic person cannot do it. It’s a technical thing. It’s something that’s quite obvious that should be done, yet it has not been done, either with anandamide or with 2-AG. So, nobody has ever given anandamide or 2-AG to a human, period.

    Q: Why do you think that there has been so much political resistance to the notion of cannabinoids as medicine?

    Dr. Mechoulam: I’m not sure that there is that much nowadays. It used to be much more. No company would ever touch anything like that many years ago. If they did, they did it kind of quietly. Now, this not so. Sanofi is going to introduce that antagonist on a very wide scale in the States. Actually, most of the major U.S. companies have cannabinoid programs. I know that Smith, Kline & Beecham has one, and so does Pfizer and Merck. So, possibly the other companies are actually waiting for people to come on the market, so they won’t be the first ones. Now that Sanofi is going to be on the market, and THC is already on the market, chances are that the other companies will come too. After all, most of the drugs on the market—the new drugs over the last twenty years let’s say—are based on being agonists or antagonists of receptors of endogenous compounds like dopamine and so on.

    Q: Besides weight loss, what would be other uses for a cannabinoid antagonist?

    Dr. Mechoulam: One of them is nicotine withdrawal, which has some nasty symptoms. Mark Twain once said, “It’s easy to stop smoking; I’ve done it many times.” So, apparently this antagonist may help with that. That’s one thing, and I’m not sure that there are not many others.

    Possibly, it may help with some of the withdrawal symptoms for other drug abuse agents, like heroin perhaps, or maybe cocaine. I’m not sure because not enough work has been done. But those are the two major things that I can see.

    Another big field will be agonists specific to the CB2 receptor. The CB2 receptor is in the periphery. We synthesized a CB2 specific agonist that has nothing to do with the CB1, which is present in the brain. It is very good for all kinds of digestive system disorders. THC is excellent for treating Crohn’s disease and things of that sort. It’s not on the market yet, but quite a few groups are working on it. So, it will definitely be very useful in those cases.

    There are other things. For example, many years ago, we elucidated the structure of a compound called cannabidiol, which is present in very large amounts in cannabis. It’s more than THC, and it is anti-inflammatory. It is excellent against rheumatoid arthritis, at least in animals. We worked together with a London group—real top of the field people in rheumatoid arthritis—and they have never seen anything as good as that. So, chances are that this particular compound, cannabidiol, can be used in rheumatoid arthritis. And it has no psychotropic effects, as a matter of fact, because it does not bind to the receptors. Maybe it has something to do with the metabolism of anandamide. Maybe it blocks the anandamide breakdown. Maybe.44

    This is something we saw, but whether it’s relevant to its activity, frankly I don’t know. So, this compound possibly will be used for rheumatoid arthritis. A company is already working on that, so it is not only the endocannabinoids as such, but also other compounds which are in the vicinity. There is also another receptor that we haven’t found yet.

    People are working on a third receptor, and we have a compound which binds to this questionable receptor actually. It has to do with peripheral action and vasodilatation. It causes vasodilatation. We have not published that yet, but I have talked about it at meetings. So vasodilatation is important, and the story is actually just starting.45 46 47 I hope that more and more people will join in elucidating these things.

    Q: What do you think should be done to help improve medical research in general?

    Dr. Mechoulam: Quite a few things. Maybe the rules are becoming more and more rigid, and now with several compounds being taken off the market, and the FDA being under a lot of pressure, chances are that it will be even more difficult to develop new drugs because a drug has to have side-effects. There is no possibility of a drug not having a side-effect. Aspirin would not be approved today. So, chances are that we’ll see a slump in new compounds coming out. I hope I’m wrong, but I’m afraid I’m not. It is not a question of money so much. I believe there is enough money. Well, there is never enough money, but there is a reasonable amount of money for medical research.

    My group has had enough support for over thirty odd years, even more. We have been supported by the U.S. National Institute of Health (initially Mental Health) and then the National Institute of Drug Abuse for a long period of time. And although we are not an American group, obviously, they have decided it’s okay, we should be supported. I had to reapply for it, but I was supported for that period of time, and they have never pushed me into any direction. They have been very liberal.

    I’ve known most of the directors, and they are frequently very good scientists. The present director is an excellent scientist. Actually, she was not born in the U.S.; she’s Mexican, and she’s an excellent scientist by any standard. So, in this respect, I can’t say that I’ve been pushed towards proving that it’s terribly bad, and that it will kill everyone. I think nothing of that sort. I’ve been doing my science, and they’ve been, I hope, happy with it.

    Q: What are you currently working on?

    Dr. Mechoulam: In collaboration with a group at N.I.H., we’re working on a new transmitter which binds to a recently discovered receptor. Whether this particular transmitter is a neurotransmitter, a transmitter of another sort, or only a vasodilator, it’s an important new compound.

    Actually, there are quite a few other compounds in the brain which are closely related, so we’re working on that. We also have some new anticancer cannabinoid compounds which seem to be pretty good.
    We recently published something about this research. These new compounds work on an enzyme called topoisomerase, and these are compounds which are very close in action to some of the known anticancer compounds. But the known compounds of this sort cause damage to the heart, and with our compounds, so far, we have seen no such damage in animals. So, hopefully this new type of cannabinoid will come out on the market. There is also a possibility that cannabinoids can be used to reduce temperature, and sometimes it’s important to reduce temperature because that prevents brain damage during a heat wave or heatstroke.

    Q: Is there anything that we haven’t discussed that you would like to add?

    Dr. Mechoulam: We’ve been lucky to work in a field where originally there wasn’t anyone else, so we could work on our research slowly, without any major competition. Now it’s a field in which there is a large group of very good people working. In the States, there are several excellent groups. There are also some excellent groups working on this in the U.K., Germany, Spain, and Italy. Though one always hears about competition between scientists, I haven’t seen it that much in this field. We are a large group that is working without really competing, and we are exchanging information all the time. So, it’s a pleasure to be working in such a field. Maybe it has something to do with ananda.

  3. Then people who drink alcohol should not be able to own a gun, since from a strict statistical standpoint alcohol users have a much greater propensity for violent crime whether sober or not. Then people who drink coffee, because that is a well-known stimulant that also statistically increases aggression. Then anyone who owns a video game that has guns in it, or anyone who has watched a TV show or movie with gun-violence, because statistically speaking they have been desensitized to said violence and are therefore statistically more inclined to commit a violent crime shortly after. Then anyone who has had a relative who has committed a violent crime, again statistics here. Then anyone who owns a gun can no longer have a gun because simply owning a gun statistically increases your chances of using it violently!

    End game: no one can have a gun, except police and military since they are under “full control.” Slippery slope big time, to a police state. Police get tanks, grenades, and machine guns. Military gets attack copters, fighter jets, and armed drones in major US cities. Damn, it’s already a police state… better not talk too loud because 1st amendment is already under attack too.

    Ironically Trump will turn out to be just as willing to destroy the constitution as Hillary ever was.

  4. I forgot to add to my previous comment… what about prescription drugs? These people who have medical marijuana cards were prescribed marijuana for a medical reason by a licensed doctor. So what’s the difference between a marijuana prescription and a painkiller opiate prescription then? Both can impair your cognitive abilities. So should everyone with any sort of prescription that can impair cognitive abilities be banned from protecting themselves with a firearm? So that military vet that got shot and now regularly takes painkillers to manage the pain of their wartime injury should be banned from owning and operating a firearm? That sounds very anti-freedom to me.

    1. Black Box Warning Label.
      ?
      Prozac, Zoloft, Celexa, Buspar, Serzone, Paxil, etc.etc.etc.
      all carry a Black Box Warning Label.
      They induce suicidal and homicidal ideation.

      “pharmakeia” = ancient greek word that means: ‘witchcraft, sorcery’.
      now, here we have our pharmaceutical syndicate giving most of us all “fix it all” pills that wind up not fixing anything, just turning us into lifelong customers.

      good post.

  5. Well stated Bob ljcat called me stupid its people like him that let government take our freedoms they are the stupid ones

  6. I’m a taxpayer, a citizen and it’s my birthright to own a gun regardless if I’m a cannibus card holder or not. The ATF needs to stay away from taxpayers, a very grey area!!

    Alcohol/marijuana… common sense. A pilot wouldn’t hit the bar before a flight, same for smoking…

    Land of the free! ATF stay out of policy making!

  7. This is just another law that will stop gun owner ship an law biding citizen to be penalized.. but out crap politicians will let a person on a NO FLY list get a firearm but if you smoke your the criminal!!!! It’s time for our bullspit politicians to wake up.. we have so much more to worry about like climate change an citizen united who flood our politicians with corporate money.. remember politicians work for US!!!! 6

  8. Marijuana users absolutely should be allowed to own and carry firearms the same as anyone who drinks alcohol can. You’re significantly more likely to do something stupid while drunk than while high anyway. And honestly, why does the use or possession of a natural plant mean you should have your natural God-given rights stolen from you? That’s utter nonsense. And if you support it, then you’re just as bad as the anti-gun left.

  9. Are you that stupid it’s not about pot or alcohol it’s about your rights do you really think that when dick Chaney shot his buddy hunting that he didn’t have alcohol in his system but it’s okay for the one’s at the top who make the rules or people like you that let them

  10. jgcat, take the time to read this gentleman’s comments and others here.
    First this gent was born here from legal immigrant parents. He is educated, makes a fair and discerning argument about freedom, not “MJ and guns.”
    Please educate yourself.

  11. It is not realy about a weed, it is freedom liberty, and the Right to/of a person to be secure in their own perso/prrsonage that is at stake; all of those freedoms are that which are endangered by an over reaching government.
    Freedom and Liberty are philisophical ideals that we as Americans formed over a period long before our Revolution that no nation or cultural grouping had ever formalized before, a limited government where the citizen was a sovereign indiividual.
    States formed their own cultures where laws were seperate from regulations and , sad to say, some even hD laws limiting religious practices and other Blue Laws based upon that areas religious,racial and other priveledged few bias’s and too this day so called drug wars among a vast amount of our religious community arevno different towards any drug use as are those who are anti gun who would throw out our Constitutional Rights over gun or weed.
    Add in the progression of the powers of the powerfull who own all three branches, by owning those who sit in those branches, power needs to be fed constantly and we now have even granted powers that make regulations into laws that do not require voters approvals.
    IMHO the last bastions of Liberty to uphold Freedoms must come from the States and not the present form of DC government.

  12. What’s needed is a test, like the breathalyzer for alcohol, to check the current level of Marijuana in someones system. It’s ridiculous to bar someone totally from owning a gun or getting a job because THC is in the persons urine. There are so many reasons some would use marijuana for medical reasons, but can’t because of big brother’s bias. If a person can partake responsibly it shouldn’t matter to anyone else whether it’s pot or booze. Certain people are going to be problems, just like the ones you can find legally consuming alcohol and being idiots at any bar. Why do we then tolerate drunks?

  13. Wow. Is this our government’s concern? Shouldn’t they be worrying about protecting people’s rights?

    My parents immigrated (legally) to the U.S. before I was born, in order to escape communism and make a better life for themselves. It was not an easy task, but I thank God every day that they did it. I grew up listening to my mother’s horror stories about Stalin’s Soviet Union, and my father’s constant reminder, “Don’t ever forget that you were born in the greatest country on earth.” They immediately learned English when they got here, both worked full time while raising two children, and they ended up with a four bedroom, three bathroom house in the suburbs with three cars when I entered high school. It took a lot of hard work; my dad had a seventh grade education and my mother had a third grade education. Both my sister and I are college grads. My parents loved this country not because it GAVE them everything — They loved it because it gave them the OPPORTUNITY to work and gain anything. It allowed them the FREEDOM to better themselves.

    Before my mother passed she made a comment that chilled my bones. I cannot remember the exact incident that caused her comment, but it was during the Bill Clinton presidency. And, to this day I can still see her face as she spoke; what I saw was not anger, or fear. It was a deep, visceral sadness. She softly said, “More and more I see this country turning into the Soviet Union.”

    I am not now, nor have I ever been, an illicit drug user. I think anyone who uses such drugs must be doing so because their life is pretty lousy. I do not even take over the counter medications for a headache. My entire life’s alcohol intake consists of half a can of beer during my first teenage party. I decided at an early age that altering my mind was not for me. I like my life, though it may not be perfect, it is MY life, and I want to live every minute of it with a clear head.

    Having said that, I do not begrudge anyone the right to do what they want with their OWN body. “…as long as it does not pick my pocket or break my arm, what business is it of mine?” — Thomas Jefferson. This is The United States of America. We are THE LAND OF THE FREE…or at least we were, at one point. When did that change?

    In college (A loooooong time ago) I bounced in a nightclub for extra spending money. I can tell you from first hand experience that alcohol causes more injury and death from violence, accidents, and illness/disease (I am currently a Registered Nurse working in a Level I Trauma Center — Emergency Dept.) than marijuana ever will. There are laws that cover the conduct of people drinking alcohol, and there should be the same for those who use pot. You will “piss hot” (positive urine test) within thirty days of using marijuana, so if you want to take the chance and roll the dice, well that should be the citizen’s decision. Just recognize that with freedoms come the inherent responsibility of paying for ones own actions. Too often we make excuses for poor judgement, and the offender gets little to no punishment. Like the kid in Texas who killed people while driving drunk and then got released after pleading “Affluenza”… What the hell justice is that!?!?

    That is what needs to change, not adding more people to the “criminal” roles before they have even commited a crime. I understand that marijuana consumers are considered criminals under Federal law, but why are we, as a people, allowing that? Doesn’t our government have better things to do than deprive citizens of their rights over stupid reasons? Alcohol is proven a much more destructive chemical, why don’t we outlaw that? Oh wait, we did…and all it did was cause more crime and suffering. Much like what we are doing with marijuana. “Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.” (Santayana)

    Again, I am not a proponent of marijuana; I am a proponent of freedom and justice. And speaking of justice, I read a study (Done by Canadians, but I cannot recall the exact reference — Sorry!!!) back in 2002, just before I left for Afghanistan. It stated that in the U.S. the average time served for murder (Not “sentenced” but “served”) was seven and a half years. The average time served for drug dealing? Ten years. Am I the only person bothered by that statistic…? My point is that there are more vital issues our government should focus its attention on.

    It is not the government’s job to protect us from ourselves; if so, we should outlaw swimming pools, automobiles, and sex. Anybody up for that…? Because if so, we are heading in the right direction and you may just get your wish. I am just thankful my mother is not around to see it.

    1. are you really that stupid to think MJ is ok with guns. go back where you came from. oh your full of thit too.

    2. If that’s what you got from reading what he wrote, you need to watch who you call stupid. Nobody thinks it’s ok to shoot guns while high. That isn’t what the discussion is about. It’s about people like you who don’t see a distinction between the responsible use of marijuana and doing dangerous things while high on ANY substance. In this language, we capitalize the first letter in a sentence, and if you are asking a question, we end that sentence with a question mark, not a period.

    3. Jgcat, the man appreciates liberty; what’s really stupid is you and your ilk, who are unable to approach an issue from the perspectives of logic and principle.

    4. jgcat

      My initial impression was to ignore your outburst; however, my second thought was “Let’s have a little fun!”

      I am a little confused; can you please point out the area in my comment where I said it is okay to use ANY mind altering substance while handling firearms? Or are you so obtuse that your only comprehension of my writing boils down to something I never claimed?

      I would say that you have the understanding of a stupid infant, but that would be slandering stupid infants…

      Also, I was born in New York. Is that where you want me to return, you imbecilic wretch? I served in both the U.S. Army’s 2nd Ranger BN (Airborne) and the 19th Special Forces Group (Airborne). I have bled for my country and would proudly do so again, just to insure that idiots like yourself can spout any ridiculous ramblings that spew out of your obviously inebriated brain. And I only give you the benefit of the doubt to assume you are drunk; because otherwise you are a coward to hide behind the internet and speak of that which you do not know, slinging arrows from the shadows.

      And now I feel guilty. The necessity to figuratively slap a disabled person has never arisen in my life, until now. So allow me to at least voice my empathy for your speech impediment when I assure you that I am NOT “…full of thit”…

      Looking forward to hearing your insightful response.

      P.S. — A sincere “Thank you” to Matthew, Dolce Mann and Bob for having the intelligence to understand the discourse, and for coming to my defense. Much appreciated, gentleman. Guys like you make me proud of my country.

    5. JoJo, wish I had seen this gibberish from jgcat earlier, and I would have jumped in as well. He’s just trolling with outrageous comments trying to get a reaction, unfortunately he’s so over the top dense and childish about it that arguing with him is a waste of time; however, you did a nice job of shutting him down in any case!

    6. Jgcat, obvious troll post; go away, the adults are having a conversation. Besides, you know you’re not supposed to play on Daddy’s computer anyway.

  14. You also take two or three hits and put it out or is that once you drink one beer you have to drink the whole case I wonder if you get it

  15. Just my two cents it’s illegal for me to use marijuana regardless whether my state allows it or not. They do! I drive tractor trailer and my license is regulated by the Federal Government the same as airline pilots for the people that feel drugs should be legalized I ask you this. Do you really want someone on drugs to drive an 80000lbs truck carrying explosives or propane or hydrogen? Do you want to fly with a pilot who just smoked. I own guns several. Laws are in place to try to keep people from hurting others and protect the innocent. I for one support keeping people who use drugs from owning firearms, We all know that people drink and hunt and because of this people have been accidentally shot so adding marijuana just makes things even more difficult for law enforcement. You can use a breathalyzer to test for alcohol but there’s no test for drugs except a blood test. I think this is just common sense!

    1. Sure Andrew, tell that to all the meth using truckers across the USA. The rule is not common sense. it is propaganda to validate the unearned paychecks of the neo-gestapo. A smart toker never drives while under the influence, and people are more likely to shoot someone if they are drunk than buzzed on weed.

    2. Just because cannabis is legal doesn’t mean everyone will be high all the time. What you do on your off time is your business. Deschedule Cannabis

    3. It doesn’t really matter what anyone thinks, it is what is the law. They won’t test you, but if they find marijuana, or any other controlled substance, and a gun in your possession, whether legal or not, you can be charged with a FEDERAL FELONY. That has always been the law!

    4. You’re conflating legal to smoke with legal to smoke while driving. Not close to the same thing. Just like alcohol.

    5. oh boy, anytime someone tells you something is “just common sense”, watch out. you’re about to get it up the wazoo. whether or not weed is legal matters not in that it will still be illegal to drive or gunplay under the influence. and common sense tells me that making something illegal doesn’t make it just disappear *poof* like magic.

    6. (Warning sarcasm to follow) There is a difference between being a user, and accomplishing a certain act while under the influence. Do you ever drink to the point where you are intoxicated? By your reasoning it would be common sense for the government to not allow you to drive a truck for a living because you do.

      There is ALWAYS going to be some “common sense” to apply to the purchase of a weapon. I KNOW that someone is going to use a firearm to harm or kill another person. Therefore it would be common sense to just ban the sale of all firearms. As a matter of fact that is the common sense the anti gunners apply. Whose common sense are we going to use? Here is an idea, let’s vote for a politician and let him lord over the common sense market.

      Common sense, I got a ton of it. Let’s have people take a parenting test before having children. Let’s make a person prove their citizenship to vote. Let’s force the use of solar thermal energy and the cheap production of solar energy mechanisms to achieve this end goal (see the 1893 world’s fair solar exhibits).

      Let’s just try following natural/scientific law, personal accountability (not to law but to harm done to others), and personal freedom before trying to talk about anyones “common sense” and see if we can get by.

  16. In my county in California, if you have a 215 and a county permit to grow, you are not allowed to have gun(s) or dogs on your parcel of land that is used to grow. Also, growing any marijuana on a parcel that receives federal subsidies( farm payments ) is precluded from receiving such subsidies. Now, who thinks these growers will calling the sheriff for protection on their 1,000 plus grows. I live less than 200′ from one such “grow”, I have dogs and am forced to carry while out and about on my farm. I don’t expect my situation to end well ….

  17. Wait a second. I just read the new form again “Are you the user of an illegal or controlled substance?” I think they would have to define “user”. How many times does it take to make a “user”. What is the frequency or last time to injest to be a “user”? Am I using now while filling out this form? NOPE. Then I define myself as a non user. Let’s all remember the defenses of the Clinton’s. It depends what your definition of the word “IS” is. I think each and every one of us regardless of any “use” can answer in all honesty, no.

  18. I don’t use cannabis however I think it should be the same rule as with alcohol. You cannot conceal carry if you are putting it in your body or at an establishment that sells it and others are ingesting it. The penalty for doing so should be the same as being caught in a bar while concealing, or caught drunk while concealing. This would differentiate between someone who has a casual drink/smoke vs someone who uses it daily. Obviously the daily user is not going to be able to carry. I could see that if you have a card, that is likely meaning you are using it daily as medication, but it wouldn’t necessarily mean that. I think the problem is that the stigma with cannabis is that everyone who has a medication card is really just a dope head, and that’s not the reality. I would suggest passing a medical physical and reflex response time. People that are dope heads are not going to go in to the sheriff’s office and fill out personal information and go through additional scrutiny to get a CCW, so I think there is no reason to have this restriction. The rule is you cannot carry if you are under the influence so you need to personally act responsibly in that way and pay the penalties if you do not, but not be denied outright.

  19. If I remember correctly, I was not pissed tested when I bought my last gun……… and less then .01 percent get investigated for not being truthful on background check.

  20. “…Growing up in Pennsylvania’s game-rich Allegany region, Dave Dolbee was introduced to whitetail hunting at a young age…”

    It’s “Allegheny”, not “Allegany”. I was born and raised in Pittsburgh; took quite a few whitetail out of Forest County. Sorry, don’t smoke pot. I suppose it should be handled legally like alcohol. Don’t drink either. My downfall is pizza. I always thought it was ironic that one can drink themselves to death in one sitting but never heard of “OD’ing” on marijuana. Didn’t the alcohol lobby have a lot to do with the anti-pot laws?

    There is no doubt that the federal government has grown all out-of-proportion to it’s intended role and is suffocating ALL of us with laws and regulation. Both parties are to blame; can’t support either. We should be ashamed with what we’re leaving our children.

    Ah well, back to reloading.

    1. I know. We used to have an IT who built out the Bio section. I cannot find where he hid it to change the spelling… Thanks for reading.~Dave Dolbee

  21. If you answer YES to question 11e, I ,as an FFL, cannot transfer a firearm to you.
    If you answer NO to 11e then you can be charged with a federal felony for making a false statement.
    In Arizona it is not a problem since we did NOT allow our citizens the freedom available in other states.
    The ATF does not care if you use alcohol???

    1. The ATF can’t even put a stamp on a piece of paper in under 6 months. Good luck drug testing 50,000 people every day.

  22. Should be legalized period. Tired of some jackoff telling me how to live. Rapist, murderers, and child molesters do less time than someone convicted of pot use.

  23. The ruling in august didn’t ban firearm ownership for marijuana users or medical patients. It bans the purchase of firearms at the time of being a medical patient or being under the influence. If you own a bunch of guns and then decide to become a medical marijuana patient, you still have the right to own firearms for self protection. Even if you are a medical patient, you can buy a gun after your permit has been expired for over a year. Its more about you at the time of purchase. Same as if you tried to buy a gun while drunk. And as for as recreationally, as long as your not “high” or addicted lol,( is marijuana even addictive?)

  24. Don’t and won’t smoke pot. But this is bs. if any a$$hole needs a federal agency to tell him what does, or does not, mix with gunpowder, the asshole doesn’t need rights – he needs a boot on his neck to “guide” him.

    1. Nice, more ignorance. Now it’s not a federal agency telling us what we need, it’s Ned. Point is, the federal government could pass any law or force any regulation, and regardless of your individual state’s laws, could bar a person from purchasing or perhaps in the future owning a gun.

      Ned, ever had a drink? It was once illegal. Could you imagine having a beer for a Sat afternoon ball game and the the Fed telling you you can’t buy a gun? Ever taken a prescription pill of your spouses for a headache, even an 800mg Motrin? That’s illegal.

      For the love of all things holy, freaking educate yourself and stop making moronic posts about boots to necks.

    2. I don’t think Ned was saying anything bad about smoking pot, just that he hasn’t, and won’t smoke it. I can relate with him, although, when I was younger, I did smoke it. I don’t, and won’t smoke it either. Although, I do drink, I have taken a pill for pain from a girlfriend or friend on occasion, so I see what you are saying. I believe Ned was saying that although he hasn’t and won’t smoke pot, it isn’t thenough business of the feds, especially if doing so is legal in the state you reside in. I may me wrong, but that’s just my take on it.

    3. I agree with you now they want to say its okay to drink and hunt and you can still buy a but if you smoke pot you can’t buy a gun what bull when our forefathers wrote the 2nd ammendment marijauna was major cash crop almost as big as cotton as long as your not doing it while hunting who gives a crap.

    4. We have a couple of generations of young and younger adults that probably WOULD benefit from a boot on the neck, or a boot to the head.

  25. New Developments in Cannabinoid-Based Medicine: An Interview with Dr. Raphael Mechoulam
    by Lara Pizzorno, MDiv, MA, LMT
    (adapted from Mavericks of Medicine by David Jay Brown)

    Raphael Mechoulam, Ph.D., is the Lionel Jacobson Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he has been working on cannabinoid chemistry (a term he coined) for more than forty years.

    Dr. Mechoulam is recognized as one of the world’s experts on cannabinoid-based medicine. In addition to his groundbreaking discoveries, he has authored hundreds of scientific papers on his cannabinoid research as well as a book, Cannabinoids as Therapeutic Agents, which provides an early review of the research in this area. Dr. Mechoulam was President of the International Cannabinoid Research Society and has received numerous honors and awards for his outstanding contributions to the field. He is a member of the Israel Academy of Sciences, and among the numerous prizes that he has received for his work, is the highest national scientific prize in Israel—the Israel Prize.

    In 1964, Dr. Mechoulam and colleague, Dr. Yehiel Gaoni, were the first to identify and synthesize delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the primary psychoactive compound in cannabis. Their discovery provided new insights into how the brain functions and opened the door to medical research exploring, not only the therapeutic potential of THC (marketed as Marinol in America), but other natural and synthetic cannabinoids as well.

    Dr. Mechoulam, along with pharmacologist Dr. Habib Edery and colleagues, went on to isolate and elucidate the structures of most members of the cannabinoid group of compounds in the cannabis plant. Twenty-eight years after discovering THC, in 1992, Dr. Mechoulam, along with Dr. William Devane and Dr. Lumir Hanus, identified the brain’s first endogenous cannabinoid (or endocannabinoid)—the brain’s natural version of THC—which they named “anandamide,” from the Sanskrit word “ananda,” which means “eternal bliss” or “supreme joy.”

    Research has since revealed that the brain is richly populated with cannabinoid neurotransmitters and receptors. Just as the active compound in opium, morphine, led to the discovery of the endogenous morphine or endorphin system in the brain, research investigating the active compound in cannabis, THC, led to the discovery of the brain’s endocannabinoid system. Later Dr. Mechoulam and colleagues identified the THC metabolites and, more recently, along with Dr. Lumir Hanus and Dr. Shimon Ben-Shabat, he discovered a second endocannabinoid known as 2-arachidonylglycerol (2-AG). These findings have profoundly advanced our understanding of cannabinoid systems.

    The Endocannabinoid System

    The endocannabinoid system is a ubiquitous lipid signaling system that we now know appeared early in evolution and has important regulatory functions throughout the body in all vertebrates. It consists of a family of G-protein-coupled receptors, the cannabinoid receptors (CB1 found in the brain and many peripheral tissues, and CB2, primarily found in immune cells); endoligands to activate these receptors; and two enzymes, the fatty acid amide hydrolase and the monoacylglycerol lipase, to metabolize the endoligands. The endoligands of the cannabinoid receptor system, small molecules derived from arachidonic acid, are called endocannabinoids.1 2

    The main endocannabinoids, anandamide (arachidonoylethanolamide) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol, bind primarily to CB1 and CB2 receptors, but also to the vanilloid receptor3 4 producing a wide diversity of effects since they function as agonists, antagonists and partial antagonists. (Cannabinoids function as antagonists to the vanilloid receptor, a.k.a. the capsaicin receptor, since it can be activated by capsaicin and is involved in the transmission and modulation of pain.)

    Neuromodulatory Effects

    Cannabinoid receptors (primarily CB1), which are found in higher concentrations than any other receptor in the brain, are densely distributed in both neuronal and glial areas, and the endocannabinoids are thought to play a critical neuromodulatory role. Cannabinoid CB1 receptor activation is known to modify the release of several neurotransmitters, including glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid, and to be involved in motor control, cognition, memory consolidation, emotional responses, motivated behavior and homeostasis.5

    The CB1 receptor is expressed in the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, where its activation modulates all the endocrine hypothalamic-peripheral endocrine axes, including the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. Endocannabinoids have been found to mediate the glucocorticoid-induced inhibition of the release of corticotrophin-releasing factor within the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus, leading some researchers to postulate that alterations in the normal “tone” of the endocannabinoid system might be associated with the development of stress-related diseases, including anxiety, depression and obesity.6 7

    Recent studies show that vigorous exercise stimulates the release of anandamide, and even exercise of moderate intensity activates the endocannabinoid system in the brain, inducing beneficial changes in mental status including analgesia, sedation, anxiolysis, and a sense of well-being.8 9

    Neuroprotective Effects

    Cannabinoids have been found to be neuroprotective agents against excitotoxicity in vitro and acute brain damage in vivo. 2-Arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG), specifically, has been shown to significantly reduce brain edema, infarct volume and hippocampal cell death after closed head injury in mice, resulting in significant improvements in functional recovery.10

    Cannabinoids have also been shown to downregulate microglial production of cytokines of the IL-2 family, lessening neuroinflammatory processes involved in demyelinating diseases such as multiple sclerosis.11 12

    In other research, cannabinoids have demonstrated neuroprotective antioxidant effects, specifically, an upregulation of mRNA levels of Cu,Zn-superoxide dismutase, a key enzyme in endogenous defenses against oxidative stress. In these studies, cannabinoids provided neuroprotection against the progressive degeneration of nigrostriatal dopaminergic neurons occurring in Parkinson’s disease.13

    Synthetic cannabinoids (HU-210, WIN-55,212-2, and JWH-133) have been able to block amyloid-beta peptide induced activation of microglia and its resulting neurotoxicity, preventing cognitive impairment in rats and offering promise as agents in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.14

    Widespread Effects beyond the Brain

    Outside the brain, the endocannabinoid system has been found to be activated in virtually every physiological system researchers have investigated, playing a critical role in the modulation of the autonomic nervous system, the immune system, reproductive and gastrointestinal tracts, sympathetic ganglia, arteries, lung, heart and endocrine glands.

    Gastrointestinal Effects

    Both CB1 and CB2 receptors are found in the gastrointestinal tract on enteric nerves, and pharmacological effects of their activation include gastroprotection via reduction of abnormally high gastric and intestinal secretion, intestinal motility and inflammation. The digestive tract also contains the endogenous cannabinoids (i.e., anandamide and 2-aracidonylglycerol) and mechanisms for endocannabinoid inactivation (i.e., endocannabinoids’ uptake and enzymatic degradation).

    This combination of actions has led researchers to suggest that pharmacological modulation of the endogenous cannabinoid system could provide new treatments for GI diseases including gastric ulcers, irritable bowel syndrome, Crohn’s disease, secretory diarrhea, paralytic ileus, and GERD. Cannabinoids (e.g., nabilone and THC) are already in use clinically as anti-emetics helping to prevent cachexia in cancer patients.15 16 17

    Insulin Modulation

    Cannabinoid compounds may one day play a role in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. In the pancreas, both CB1 and CB2 receptors are found on pancreatic islet cells where CB1 stimulation has been shown to enhance insulin and glucagon secretion, while CB2 activation lowers glucose-dependent insulin secretion.18 19 20

    Anti-inflammatory Effects

    Cannabinoids’ anti-inflammatory actions may render these agents helpful in the treatment of arthritis. Several recently developed synthetic cannabinoid agonists (including HU-210 and WIN-55,212-2) have been shown to inhibit the expression of iNOS and COX-2, and the resulting activation of NF-kappaB, thus protecting the cartilage matrix from degradation induced by cytokines and attenuating joint damage in animal models of arthritis.21

    Potential Clinical Applications

    Controlled studies have revealed therapeutic potential of cannabinoid agonists/antagonists and cannabinoid-related compounds in the treatment of multiple sclerosis and other spasticity ailments, neurodegenerative disorders (Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s disease, Tourette’s syndrome, Alzheimer’s disease), schizophrenia, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, glioma, cancer chemotherapy side-effects, chronic pain, glaucoma, AIDS wasting syndrome, seizure disorders such as epilepsy, obesity, and metabolic syndrome-related disorders.22

    Properties of CB receptor agonists that are of therapeutic interest include analgesia, muscle relaxation, immunosuppression, anti-inflammation, anti-allergic effects, improvement of mood, stimulation of appetite, anti-emesis, lowering of intraocular pressure, bronchodilation, neuroprotection and anti-neoplastic effects. Currently, a main focus of clinical research is cannabinoids’ efficacy in chronic pain and neurological disorders.

    Cannabinoid analgesics have generally been well tolerated in clinical trials with acceptable adverse event profiles. Sativex, an oromucosal spray containing equal proportions of THC (a CB1 receptor agonist) and cannabidiol (a non-euphoriant, anti-inflammatory analgesic CB1 receptor antagonist) was approved in Canada for treatment of central neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis in 2005, and for intractable cancer pain in 2007. Numerous randomized clinical trials have demonstrated safety and efficacy for Sativex in central and peripheral neuropathic pain, rheumatoid arthritis and cancer pain. In the U.S., the FDA approved an Investigational New Drug application for Sativex to conduct advanced clinical trials for cancer pain in January 2006.23
    CB receptor antagonists are also under investigation for medical use in nicotine addiction and obesity. CB1 antagonists have been shown to decrease nicotine self-administration in rodent models of nicotine dependence.24 While CB1 agonists increase feeding in rats and humans, CB1 antagonists have been shown to have the opposite effect, significantly suppressing rats’ food intake regardless of type of diet (standard lab chow, high fat or high carbohydrate). While some CB1 antagonists also induce nausea and malaise, others have been shown to suppress feeding without these negative side effects.25 26 27

    Additional potential for CB receptor antagonists has been proposed for the treatment of alcohol and heroine dependency, schizophrenia,28 29 conditions with lowered blood pressure, Parkinson’s disease30 and memory impairment in Alzheimer’s disease.31 32

    Cannabinoid Analogs Currently in Drug Development

    While the political controversy over medical marijuana continues in America, pharmaceutical companies—such as G.W. Pharmaceuticals in the United Kingdom and Sanofi-Synthélabo Recherché in France—are busy researching and developing a wealth of new medications based on cannabinoids. A wave of new drugs are currently being developed from cannabinoid analogs—both agonists and antagonists of cannabinoid receptors in the brain—from new types of pain killers and neuroprotective agents for head trauma and stroke victims, to appetite stimulants and appetite suppressants.

    Recently, one of the synthetic compounds (HU-211) from Dr. Mechoulam’s lab completed phase 2 clinical trials against head trauma with evidence of neuroprotective effects. Another synthetic cannabinoid investigated by Dr. Mechoulam’s team, HU-331, may be a new potent anticancer drug. HU-331, a highly specific inhibitor of topoisomerase II, has been found to be highly anti-angiogenic, and when compared to doxorubicin, was significantly less cardiotoxic while producing a 30% greater reduction in tumor burden than doxorubicin and other topoisomerase inhibitors.33 34 35 36 Yet other cannabinoid agonists, specifically HU-210 and JWH-133, have been found to promote the differentiation of glioma stem-like cells (one of the potential origins of glioma), and to inhibit malignant glioma formation in vivo.37

    The pace of cannabinoid research has been significantly accelerating over the past few years, and Dr. Mechoulam—who has been at the forefront of this research since the beginning—thinks these new cannabinoid analog drugs are just the tip of the iceberg.

    1. Excellent article, of the over 5,000 strains of Cabanas only about 5% of them are intoxicants. The medical strains have been around for 10,000 years and were available up to about a 100 years ago. They were banned at the behest of the alcohol and big pharma interests who have vilified the plant ever since.

  26. The feds act as if they have grown up and are now adults, darn it, the government. Well folks, when are they going to see that, “WE THE PEOPLE “, are also adults, but what a pity, we let them tell us what we can do, and dammit, when are we going to tell them your are not my parents? I, as an adult, have been doing as l see fit, you ain’t my DADDY and l am not your !$?$:#<¡÷* SLAVE. DON'T, l say, DON'T TREAD ON US because we are &!!:;#;READY!!!

  27. The reason for the 18th Amendment (prohibition) was the understanding that the federal government lacked the constitutional authority to ban alcohol. In the same way it lacks the authority to ban marijuana or any other drug for that matter. At best it is a states rights issue and that too is suspect constitutionally. Doubling down on that the federal government lacks any authority to prevent marijuana (or alcohol) users from purchasing firearms. As with all such “laws’ there is no obligation to obey them.

  28. It might be time to wake up and smell the stuff you are walking in. Doctors perform complicated surgeries under the influence of drugs and/or drink. Airline pilots and Warfighters, Judges, Lawyers, Firemen and Cops have been known to ply their Trade under the influence as well. Humans are all flawed in one way or another and everybody is one crisis away from a meltdown it seems. That doesn’t mean we need to keep writing and passing new Laws that disrupt innocent Peoples lives just to cover a possibility. We have way too many Laws that are completely unenforced… Why? To provide work for lawmakers? Guess what? We have way too many Lawmakers and they get paid FOREVER! There is something Very Wrong with that.

  29. Maybe the Feds should roll themselves a “fattie” and take a couple hits to mellow themselves out. I’d rather be in a room with a hundred well armed pot smokers then one hot headed drunk with a BB gun.

  30. The Federal government has overstepped it’s authority to ban a plant in the first place. America is doomed, just like Rome was. Prepare, because you and your families lives may depend on it.

    In the mean time it is perfectly fine to conceal carry and walk into a store to buy booz, which is much worse than cannabis.

    1. Who says, you? I know of a lot more people’s lives wiped out with this as compared to alcohol. Do we really need another intoxicating substance just because it’s popular?

    2. John, stop lying. Nobody gets their “life wiped out” from smoking some weed. Unless they loose their job because of some BS drug test for pot. PLENTY of people have had their lives ruined by alcohol abuse, it’s not even close. Alcohol abuse WILL KILL YOU. Haven’t you seen Leaving Las Vegas?? You can smoke pounds of weed at a time, you can only get so high, it won’t kill you. Nobody smokes weed and beats their wife and children, people get drunk and abuse their families every day. You need to wake up and stop lying.

  31. Madison made if perfectly clear in Federalist Paper 45:
    “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined… The [federal powers] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce… the powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

  32. While I disagree with the federal, or even state, government blocking ownership of fire arms, I also believe that Marijuana and fire arms do not mix. Much like alcohol do not mix. Anything thing that will reduce your ability to use common sense while handling any fire arm is a bad idea.

    1. I smoke almost every night. It helps me to get a normal amount of sleep. And when I choose to smoke, I also make the decision not to carry my firearm. The same applies when going out to the bar when I plan on drinking. Just because you smoke pot doesn’t mean you are incapable of making reasonable decisions. We need to stop making up laws for victimless crimes.

  33. Bigger concern for me is the involvement in the government: #1. Over reaching state jurisdiction. #2. Opening Pandora’s box regarding control OVER the 2nd amendment, especially regarding medication, without evidence, due cause or due process. Allowing blanket refusals for for purchase, later possibly possession of weapons by persons utilizing state legalized (not in my state, probably ever) medication. What is to stop more over reach to include something so benign as aspirin users from also being excluded?

  34. Rather not be at the local range with anyone who is using marijuana, medical or not. Federal/state law I don’t care. Stray bullets don’t care either.

    1. Absolutely! And I’d rather not be at the local range with anyone who had a glass of wine with dinner the night before, or who had a beer st lunch! Since my own personal safety is the single most important, most overriding concern on the entire planet, I think we should all be “safe,” and have the nanny-state government ban gun ownership for anyone who has ever consumed alcohol!

      For that matter, they should ban gun ownership for anyone who has ever lost their temper, been in a fistfight, driven over the speed limit, or cheated on their taxes! (Character issues.). “Stray bullets don’t care,” and you know the old creed of tyrants: “If it saves one life!”

      Impaired is impaired, there’s already laws against that. Helping to perpetuate divisive myths about one method of impairment against another just reinforces the illogic behind the Bureau of Allegations, Tales, and Fabrications stupid decree, and gives ammunition to the Statists who are always trying to disarm us, and incrementally erode our right of self-defense.

    2. I think we all agree. But the form 4473 is only for buying a firearm, not going to a range and shooting while under the influence. The question is asinine.

  35. One’s personal views on marijuana are inconsequential in determining this matter; chiefly because there is no matter to be determined. Simply put, the federal government has usurped an authority that it was never constitutionally authorized to have.

    The Constitutional authority for each and every enumerated power the federal government was ever allowed to exercise has always and only ever flowed directly from the individual people through each of the States.

    However, in our never-ending quest to set a shining example unto the rest of the world in order to show that our Country is the most civilized constitutional nation of laws, we lost ourselves to increasingly complex and intentionally convoluted legalese which now has created a stranglehold on the enumerated authority which allowed the federal government to even exist in the first place.

    How else does one explain what has happened to the simplicity of the Second Amendment which has somehow been trumped by an ever expansive judicial re-interpretation of the “Commerce Clause”?

    The Second Amendment is clearly speaking directly to the federal government, with a very specific warning that – in no way, shape, or form do they have the authority to take any action that would infringe on the Right to bear arms. Yet each and every day, through our own inaction, we somehow increasingly empower the federal government to tell us otherwise.

    So NO, one’s personal use of marijuana has no more legal bearing than alcohol use when determining a fundamental God-given Right to defend oneself. How on earth did we ever allow the federal government to get to this point?

    1. Outstanding G-Man, you totally nailed it. To answer your question, I think we got this way because the freedom-loving libertarian-minded people who know what you stated intuitively aren’t the ones grasping for power, and seeking to impose their distorted views on others. Those people are the ones always looking to pass new restrictions on the rest of us, and it just takes a few of the Feinsteins and Schumers and Newsomes to undo all of the work the Founders so carefully put in place. The only defense is eternal vigilance and a willingness to stand up and say “No, you’re NOT going to do that, and if you do, I won’t comply.” Civil Defense thru Civil Disobedience then becomes your only option.

      Anyway, again, very well said!

    2. I think you mean Liberal, not libratarians. Libratarians love and support the 2nd Amendment as well as the right of individuals to harm their bodies with out the threat of government deciding whether or not it is right or wrong.

    3. No, I meant Libertarian, not Liberal; read what I wrote completely before responding. I am a Libertarian, not a Liberal, and support the 2nd Amendment, which is why I wrote exactly what I did.

      Christ, I swear no one reads carefully anymore.

    4. “J,” I think you misread Norm’s comment. He said that “libertarian-minded people” were NOT the ones “seeking to impose their distorted views on others.” IOW, “those people” do not include the aforementioned “freedom-loving libertarian-minded people.”

    5. My God, you have said it all, perfect
      in every word. I would have voted for you if you were running for President. Now folks it’s really time for waking up, quit being a “Baaaaaaaaaa???? we are grown-UPS, we are✌????

    6. Well put, however, I think State government needs to be included. The fact that State or Federal government is being allowed to trample or 2nd amendment rights is unacceptable… And the fact that our only recourse is to spend enormous amounts of money to fight these governmental over steps in order to have the Supreme Court decide if they are violating our constitutional rights is appalling. Meanwhile state passed, unconstitutional laws can be passed and put into practice without a vote of the people. California is a perfect and unfortunate example.

    7. I believe that most people forget the 10th because they believe that government will take care of them. These people are called sheep, they are dangerous. Seemingly unimportant and non confrontational they lie down and take whatever ia given them and out the restcof us in danger.

  36. Remember THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, can be detected in blood and/or urine up to 30 days in heavy users. Just sayin’….

    1. No, Scott, that isn’t true. Drug tests look for another compound that can stay in your bloodstream for 30 days or even longer. It is not a psychoactive compound. Do some research before you post.

    2. Regardless, marijuana use can be detected for a long time after the fact. This is often used against people by their employers, or prospective employers. If Bill gets stinking drunk Saturday night, while John uses a little marijuana, Bill will pass a Monday “drop;” John will fail one for weeks afterwards. Just because it’s detectable for longer doesn’t make it worse. I’d rather deal with an occasional marijuana user than a chronic alcoholic.

  37. Well I have read the comments so far and I must say I am disappointed, even those who do use and even those who have in the past all should know that using a firearm while under the influence of pot is no different from using a firearm while drunk and is dangerous to all in the vicinity and even the handler.
    I agree with Sean in that the federal government should be the ones in charge of the regulation of firearms and they should be more open to public input.
    Speaking from past experience smoking tends to become a constant habit that is easily abused just like tobacco and easy to stay stoned most of the waking time which creates just another opportunity for disaster. I grew out of my bad habits and it took me some time to see just how far I had ventured into the badlands.
    If you want the responsibility of owning and carrying a weapon then you need to be responsible for all your actions all the time.
    Even if pot is legalized at the federal level because of the addictive nature of it I do not think gun owners should participate.

  38. I have worked and played in regions of the world where we went armed in the bars. A free people should be allowed the liberty and the opportunity to screw up, and pay the consequences.

    1. So the consequences of that screw up are suffered by more than the impaired individual. They are suffered by the victim(s) of that individual as well

    2. Yep. That is true of many things. It’s called Liberty. It’s called freedom of choice. It’s called being an adult citizen, responsible for one’s own actions.

    3. Just as many might suffer from an illegal alien, driving drunk, in a stolen car. Or suffer from you or I, if our attention wanders the wrong direction at the wrong time. The liberty to drive should not reduced for all others, solely because “accidents happen” and “others might suffer”.

    4. ” A free people should be allowed the liberty and the opportunity to screw up, and pay the consequences.”
      As long as you are the only jug head that is hurt by your screw up then that is fine but when/if your screw up endangers or injuries someone else then that is where your rights come to a screeching halt.

    1. Well they kinda do. It is one of the questions on the 4473. “Have you ever been charged with any alcohol or drug related offenses”

    2. Ahh, but alcohol is ‘Federally legal,’ marijuana is not. You can’t go to prison for drinking alcohol, but you can for using drugs. Still, if I had my preferences, I’d rather not meet either on the highway.

    3. Ahh, but get caught discharging a weapon under the influence of alcohol and in some states even in your possession and find out how fast you can go to jail. Just because alcohol is legal to posses and use does not make it safe carry a weapon if consuming and I think this discussion will ultimately sooner than later bring this to a head.

  39. Due to the VERY well documented very mind altering effects of said drug I completely agree. ANY gun range or training facility you go to has the rule “NO drugs or alcohol while guns are in use” because peopl do stupid things while drunk or high. 99.9 % of RESPONSIBLE gun owners agree (I hope)

    1. More often than the casual alcohol user. 1 beer in a 170lb or more person does nothing to impair but one joint……

    2. So you are so naive that you want to compare the effects of one beer to a WHOLE joint? Because if I light that joint I MUST finish it?
      Your comparisons are absolutely hilarious and shows your lack of knowledge on the subject.

    3. I don’t really think many, if anyone, is arguing that you should be allowed to carry and/or operate a firearm while high. The same applies for carrying or operating a firearm when drunk. But people who smoke, just like people who drink, are not intoxicated all the time. I personally smoke almost every night before bed to help myself get to sleep. I also make the conscious decision not to carry or operate any of my firearms when intoxicated. It’s really not that difficult of a concept. If we’re going to ban marijuana users from owning guns just because a few users are going to be irresponsible and be high all the time and also operate firearms while high, then we also need to ban alcohol users from owning firearms just because a few alcohol users out there can’t handle their alcohol or have a drinking problem. Taking someone’s right to protect themselves just because there’s a few “bad apples” amongst cannabis users is the same as saying we should take away people’s rights to protect themselves because some people commit crimes with guns.

  40. All firearm regulation should be done at the federal level. The obligation to regulate firearms was given to the federal government through the second amendment and that means that all of California’s B.S. firearm regulations should be overturned or forced into federal compliance. The regulation of drugs was never expressly given to the federal government by the Constitution and should be a state’s rights issue. We need to start forcing the governments at the federal, state, and local to stay in their original jurisdictions because when they don’t we get into situations where the law becomes grey when it needs to be black and white.

    1. How do you construe that an amendment that is there to remind the Feral Government that they do not have the power to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms what so ever, “Provides” them anything?

    2. “The obligation to regulate firearms was given to the federal government through the second amendment . . . ”

      What? There is something in the Second Amendment about “shall not be infringed.”. I don’t read anything there that delegate regulation of firearms to anyone.

  41. This is an over reaching of the Federal Government. This Government was founded for the people for the people and fo the people. That pretty much sums up the right way to look at this ridiculous change in the Constitution

  42. If I was one who had a Drs prescription for the constituents of marijuana, I would chose to ignore the Federal law as in my view as an early American and Constitutional Investigative Historian, Libertarian, Mil Vet and Oath Keeper that it is null and void and as it is an unconstitutional reach it is repugnant to the Constitution.

  43. Oh, damn! Guess I’m busted now as I’m going to have answer “yes” to this, just like I do on the question “Are you a fugitive from justice?” Didn’t count on those super-sleuths at the ATF coming up with such a clever question. Drat…!

  44. In most cases I think that “big brother’ sticks his nose where it is not only not wanted, but not needed as well. However in this case, I am in complete agreement that anyone who uses Mary Jane should not be allowed to purchase a weapon whether it be a gun, knife or otherwise as Mary Jane impairs ones thinking process. I can see where it would be used as a scapegoat as a reason for committing a crime just as mental illness is. There is, simply, too much risk involved to allow anyone who uses it for any purpose to be allowed to purchase a firearm.

    1. So the tools necessary to defend oneself are being denied because why? Because if one has a legitimate use for it they no longer have that natural inalienable right of self defense?
      So they no longer have an inalienable (can’t be taken away or denied) right to the tools necessary to defend themselves? My oath is to the Constitution irrespective of my opinion or my politics, yes freedom can be a risk to others.

    2. I’m sure you feel the same way about people who consume alcohol, right? If you got drunk yesterday, you shouldn’t be allowed to purchase a firearm today, right?

    3. Good point! Really well thought out there. And since the ATF also covers all things “alcohol” then there also needs to be a question asked “have you ever had a drink of wine at dinner, or a beer at a ball game,” and if you answer “yes,” then you shouldn’t ever be allowed to own a gun. After all, everyone’s safety is just SO important, we can’t take any chances! There’s simply too much risk involved. (And there is zero difference between the impairment effects of alcohol and “Mary Jane.”)

    4. Seriously? How is it that a person who might partake of “the evil weed” legally in his state, in his own home, say watching football on Superbowl Sunday, and again watching the World series with a couple buddies, is more of a threat to buy a gun 2 weeks later, than the guy who goes out, gets hammered every friday?? But it’s OK for the drinker to buy one on any given Monday?

    5. Why should I not be able to own a gun just because I smoke weed it’s not like it turns me into a crazed maniac or a mean SOB just looking to start something like alcohol can or meth or Crack it’s not like I’m going to try and eat someone’s face off. I just move a little slower and a little forgetful and the impairment effects of weed and alcohol are not the same. So why should I not be allowed to own a firearm just because I smoke a joint with my morning coffee. Know I don’t mean it’s OK to go shooting when stoned.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.