The Twin Crusades Against Drugs and Guns

[Pertinacious Tom]

More on FL Ag Commissioner Fried's suit.

A Judge Accepts the Biden Administration's Dubious Argument for Banning Gun Possession by Marijuana Users

...
Florida is one of 37 states that allow medical use of marijuana, most of which also have legalized recreational use—a policy supported by two-thirds of Americans. Under federal law, by contrast, marijuana remains illegal for all purposes except government-approved research, and simple possession is punishable by a fine of $1,000 or more and up to a year in jail.

For marijuana users who own guns, the potential penalties are much more severe. They include up to 15 years in prison for illegal firearm possession, up to 15 years for "trafficking in firearms" by obtaining a gun, and up to 10 years for failing to report cannabis consumption on the form required for gun purchases from federally licensed dealers.

...

Winsor noted a long history of banning gun ownership by people convicted of certain crimes. But as Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett pointed out in a 2019 dissent as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, that history does not suggest that any crime, or even any felony, will do.


"Legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns," Barrett wrote. "But that power extends only to people who are dangerous."

Are cannabis consumers dangerous? Winsor suggested that they are, accepting the Biden administration's analogy between the gun ban for marijuana users and laws enacted in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries that prohibited people from either carrying or firing guns "while intoxicated."


That analogy fails, however, because those laws did not impose general bans on gun possession by drinkers. They applied only when gun owners were under the influence.


The implausibility of the Biden administration's historical argument is compounded by the fact that the "crime" of consuming marijuana did not exist when the Second Amendment was ratified or when the 14th Amendment required that states respect the right to keep and bear arms. Throughout the 19th century, cannabis, opium, and other currently prohibited substances were legally available over the counter and widely consumed as ingredients in patent medicines.


It seems highly doubtful that Americans of that era would have thought eschewing such products should be a condition for exercising the rights protected by the Second Amendment and state equivalents. Yet the Biden administration insists that it should, even as the president decries the injustice wrought by the war on weed.

I'm a yuge fan of questions to which the answer is obvious, but which won't be answered, so in light of the rejection of Fried's lawsuit, this one bears repeating:

Who here thinks that Hunter Biden's drug use made him too dangerous to own a gun? I don't.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Did your brother die of shame?

No, as I told you, he died of cancer earlier this year. Why do you ask?

 

[LB 15]

No, as I told you, he died of cancer earlier this year. Why do you ask?

Well Tommy gun, that quote is 8 months old and from a different thread. Why do you only reply now and in a different thread? Have you run out of excuses for being a small dicked fucktard gun lover?

 

[pusslicker]

The Twin Crusades Against Drugs and Guns



Seems to me that TeamR will tolerate most any abuse in the name of the stupid drug war, just as TeamD will even tolerate Trump's abuse of power if the result is gungrabby.

What gun grab? You can't possibly say that the Dems are doing anything at all to grab your guns. What the fuck? Liberals like guns just as much. This is the one issue both sides agree on.

 

[Olsonist]

Tom will be along shortly to say that if a multiple DUI wife beater is not free to have guns then no one is free. That and Hillary, always Hillary.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

What gun grab? You can't possibly say that the Dems are doing anything at all to grab your guns. What the fuck? Liberals like guns just as much. This is the one issue both sides agree on.

In the context of the post to which you replied, I thought it pretty obvious I was talking about Trump's bump stocka ban/confiscation program.

But that's only one. The US House passed a ban on battlefield .22's and other suitable militia weapons. That's doing something to grab guns. Proposing the same in the Senate is doing something else. There's a thread about it.

Similarly, FL grabbers have proposed banning battlefield .22's by legislation and by constitutional amendment. All of those proposals are "doing anything at all" to grab our guns. There's a thread about those efforts as well.

Your unawareness of these actions doesn't mean they didn't happen. Just means you didn't know. Now you do. You're welcome .

 

[Keith]

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Tom will be along shortly to say that if a multiple DUI wife beater is not free to have guns then no one is free.

No clue who you're gossiping about once again, possibly because I'm more interested in ideas and you're only interested in gossip about people, as demonstrated by the number of your posts that begin "Tom will..."

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

What gun grab? You can't possibly say that the Dems are doing anything at all to grab your guns. What the fuck? Liberals like guns just as much. This is the one issue both sides agree on.

I did say that Trump instituted a bump stocka grab.

What do you think about that anyway? I think Obama was right when he concluded (three times) that the President doesn't have the power to ban bump stocka. For that reason, I think Trump abused his power.

Do you think Trump or Obama is a better judge of the powers of the Presidency? Going to take a wild guess that you'll say Obama. OK, can you name any other issue on which Trump has abused his power and gotten absolutely no flack about it from TeamD? I can't.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Florida Ag Commissioner Appeals Dismissal Of Medical Marijuana Patients’ Gun Rights Lawsuit

...
Commissioner Nikki Fried (D) and her patient co-plaintiffs appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on Wednesday.

“As I said when I filed this lawsuit, no patient should have to choose between their medicine and employment, or a roof over their head, or access to capital—or any of their constitutional rights,” Fried said in a press release.

The case centers on the argument that the federal firearms ban for cannabis patients is unconstitutional.
...

I hope the 11th Circuit sees it her way.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

What the fuck? Liberals like guns just as much. This is the one issue both sides agree on.

This is not so apparent when a shooting that seems politically convenient for gungrabby purposes occurs. Responses are along these lines:

Like I said 2 kinds of people own guns KILLERS or COWARDS

T's n P's

'mericans don't care , why should we ?

 

[Not for nothing]

Take your fucking, Thoughts and Prayers​

There Worthless​

Gun deaths are considered an epidemic in the United States (which leads the world in civilian gun ownership) by many people,

Countries with the Highest Total Gun Deaths (all causes) in 2019​

1. Brazil — 49,436
2. United States — 37,038
3. Venezuela — 28,515
4. Mexico — 22,116
5. India — 14,710

19 Countries with the Most School Shootings (total incidents Jan 2009-May 2018 - CNN):​

• United States — 288
• Mexico — 8
• South Africa — 6
• Nigeria & Pakistan — 4
• Afghanistan — 3

and getting worst
The 45,222 total gun deaths in 2020 were by far the most on record, representing a 14% increase from the year before, a 25% increase from five years earlier and a 43% increase from a decade prior.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Countries with the Highest Total Gun Deaths (all causes) in 2019

I guess you couldn't find the relevant thread, but we've been discussing the fact that the USA has a pretty average suicide rate for many years.

My reaction remains the same. Banning battlefield .22's and other suitable militia weapons isn't going to do a damn thing to reduce our suicide rate.

Must be the guns.

...

 

[Not for nothing]

My reaction remains the same. Banning battlefield .22's and other suitable militia weapons isn't going to do a damn thing to reduce our suicide rate.

This is true, but being a war vet, I can't see the purpose of the average person having a weapon having a BATTLEFIELD ,22's, they are made with one purpose mass killing, so unless you're planning a mass killing, why have one?
I think most suicides done with a single shot pistol, unless you have really bad aim.
and in all suicides the shooter knows the victim

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

This is true, but being a war vet, I can't see the purpose of the average person having a weapon having a BATTLEFIELD ,22's, they are made with one purpose mass killing, so unless you're planning a mass killing, why have one?

What if there's a nincomcoup and we need to form a militia to resist it?

That used to be a ridiculous question but times change and now the potential need for battlefield .22's and other suitable militia weapons should be apparent to all.

 

[Not for nothing]

What if there's a nincomcoup and we need to form a militia to resist it?

That used to be a ridiculous question but times change and now the potential need for battlefield .22's and other suitable militia weapons should be apparent to all.

who determines a good guys with an Ak versus a bad guys with one?
I thought that's the reason we have a trained Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines
But would trust an untrained militia of a bunch of overweigh morons?

And if your right at the nincomcoup on 1/6 they all the rioters should have been shot dead on the steps of the capitol building,
now that I agree with!

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

who determines a good guys with an Ak versus a bad guys with one?
I thought that's the reason we have a trained Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines

It's an interesting question. In places with strong gun control laws like NY, we had a system under which cops determine who is good enough to have a gun.

Shockingly, it turns out that cops in America can occasionally be racist, so they stop and frisk people or dole out gun permits based on skin color and political contributions.

I don't think that skin color or political contributions are good ways to answer your question, so I supported taking that power away from them. What do you think? Should cops decide who gets to exercise their rights to buy a gun or walk down the street unfrisked?

 

[Not for nothing]

It's an interesting question. In places with strong gun control laws like NY, we had a system under which cops determine who is good enough to have a gun.

Shockingly, it turns out that cops in America can occasionally be racist, so they stop and frisk people or dole out gun permits based on skin color and political contributions.

I don't think that skin color or political contributions are good ways to answer your question, so I supported taking that power away from them. What do you think? Should cops decide who gets to exercise their rights to buy a gun or walk down the street unfrisked?

Shit if either one of us could figure out that answer, we'd be geniuses.
It would be nice to have a do over, but this country was founded and grew because of guns.
and anything (laws) are generalization to where and why, (one shoe doesn't fit all)
It just seems in my life the usage of guns has changed, before it was mostly robberies, one on one.
Now it's the wrongs you were treated in life, from your first-grade teacher to you coworkers that bullied you and everything in between. It used to be if a car cuts you off, you gave them the finger, now your shot at.
I feel COPS should the last ones to decide the solution.
It used to be a cop, went to stop a robbery, The cop and robber knew the "rules". now both are afraid of being shot. so, they shoot first, both are afraid of each other.

 

[Not for nothing]

interesting what the rest of the world thinks of us
Have we become a 3rd world nation?

What travel warnings do other nations give their citizens about US violence?

From Australia to the United Kingdom, CNN Travel looks at what other governments tell their citizens about staying safe in a United States where mass shootings and gun violence have become commonplace.

www.cnn.com

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

interesting what the rest of the world thinks of us
Have we become a 3rd world nation?

What travel warnings do other nations give their citizens about US violence?

From Australia to the United Kingdom, CNN Travel looks at what other governments tell their citizens about staying safe in a United States where mass shootings and gun violence have become commonplace.

www.cnn.com

Hah! No, we haven't, and if anyone actually reads the travel advisories from various governments, they all say it's safe to come here. New Zealand is slightly worried about terrorism for some reason and the French actually dare to say which neighborhoods are dangerous, but the idea that this article in any way suggests we're a third world nation could really only be sold to non-readers. Should do OK around here.