Legally Stoned on Pot - No Problem, here is your carry license - Page 2

Legally Stoned on Pot - No Problem, here is your carry license

This is a discussion on Legally Stoned on Pot - No Problem, here is your carry license within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by BigStick You guys want to give guns to drug dealers!!!??? How could you? You want those drug dealers to kill babies with ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 53
Like Tree24Likes

Thread: Legally Stoned on Pot - No Problem, here is your carry license

  1. #16
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by BigStick View Post
    You guys want to give guns to drug dealers!!!??? How could you? You want those drug dealers to kill babies with those guns!

    Sorry, just had to throw out the probable response of the Brady Bunch. We know they will probably say something to that effect.

    It sounds sketchy to be supporting druggies to get guns, but I do understand the sentiment being expressed so far. This guy may be a good exapmle of how one mistake should not destroy the rest of your life, but I am wary of who all might try to take advantage of the president.
    It's not just the Brady's, many old conservatives are so anti drugs they think it turns people into rapists and whatever nonsense Reefer Madness threw at them.

    Smoking weed doesn't make one a druggy in my mind, and doing it shouldn't have any bearing on constitutional rights. Or jobs for that matter when it's off the clock, but that's a different story.


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,632
    Wow, title is really misleading. Good on the courts using common sense.
    CaveJohnson likes this.

  3. #18
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,076
    Quote Originally Posted by BigJon10125 View Post
    I am sure that we will see this come full circle as more states are realizing the Medical (and tax!) value of marijuana. Heck I am surprised everything isn't legal here for as bad as we are economically. Government loves their tax money!
    Recreational pot was almost legal with Prop 19 in 2010 but failed 53.5% to 46.5%. I voted against it not because I have a problem with legal pot but because the government comes with hat in hand on election day and spends more than they collect the rest of the time. They don't deserve any more tax money. Throw the tea in the harbor.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  4. #19
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,076
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    We believe that this is a step toward defining the “suitable person” language in the state’s carry licensing law to mean that anyone who isn’t prohibited by law from possessing a gun shouldn’t be prohibited from concealed carry.
    This is the kind of thing that we are addressing with California's requirement of "good moral character" for the sheriff to issue a permit. This is equivalent to NH's "suitable person" requirement. The definition should be anyone not prohibited by law from possessing a gun shouldn't be prohibited from concealed carry. IOW, without due process - of the individual case-by-case - "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  5. #20
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Yeah, and alcoholics don't psend their paycheck on booze.....................so after years of drinking their brain is so re-wired they act differently than as they did before drinking. And they can afford guns and can carry during their brief moments of sobriety....
    Ok.. So what's your point. I'm not familiar with the life style. That's for enlightening me.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    It's not just the Brady's, many old conservatives are so anti drugs they think it turns people into rapists and whatever nonsense Reefer Madness threw at them.

    Smoking weed doesn't make one a druggy in my mind, and doing it shouldn't have any bearing on constitutional rights. Or jobs for that matter when it's off the clock, but that's a different story.
    The thread wasn't started to debate what makes a habitual user a habitual user. It was, at least as I read, someone getting their gun rights back after committing a misdemeanor. It just happened to be possession of a controlled substance. As far as am aware, smoking pot is still illegal in the eyes of most states and according to the Feds. Smoking it maintains the possession there of. Committing crimes does affect ones legal gun rights. To another poster in this thread. The difference is Alcohol is a legal substance. If the resulting Alcohol usage brought forth legal issues resulting from chronic use or one time stupidity; I guess could result in the same right to own firearms issues. I'm no doctor so I won't debate or be bated into what makes an addict an addict. I only comment on the usage and possession of illegal substances as a crime. I assume if smoking pot were legal then the same legalities like driving under the influence and stoned in public would apply as it does to Alcohol. I would hope so. The degree of the crime is left up to the states and the morality on if smoking pot as a crime is probably left to debated on another forum. Smoking pot may not make a "druggie" but the possession of the controlled substance is a crime. I don't have any pot, my Fridge isn't full of Buds and Wild Turkey still lives in the woods.. I do not use theses products so my vision into the life style and issues created by the life style is rather limit. To be honest about it, want no part of or association with those that do. Being around impaired people has no allure. I have seen others affected by the resulting issues and it doesn't look like any fun. Us old conservatives got old for a reason. We must know something.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  7. #22
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    Ok.. So what's your point. I'm not familiar with the life style. That's for enlightening me.
    In reply to this:
    True, but most stoners need to buy dope rather than a gun. If they had a gun before they became a stoner they probably pawned it to get high. I don't know how much a bag of pot is but I do know how much my sweet Sig was and I don't think a stoner could afford one.
    You seem to equate folks that smoke pot as folks that will spend theri last dime on it. Just not true. I noticed you phrased your post as an opinion...just trying to make you more informed I am pretty sure a ;ot of "stoners" can afford what ever they want.

    And I was also comparing "stoners" to alcoholics, not in the legal sense, but as far as how much money they spend on booz and pot. The alcoholic is much more likely to pawn a gun or something to buy booze than a "stoner". Also, satying away from what is legal and what is not. Alcoholics brain chemistry get out of whack even when not drunk. If they do not get their booze and go into withdrawal they can get erratic. It just irks me when folks dog people that smoke pot from an ethical point of view but think getting bombed is just hunky dory. Just sober up and you are just fine to carry a gun(all of those not aimed at you )
    Harvester likes this.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  8. #23
    VIP Member Array varob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    4,451
    It seems like it would have been easier for him to have the charge expunged.
    Don't believe what you hear and only half of what you see!
    -Tony Soprano

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    In reply to this:

    You seem to equate folks that smoke pot as folks that will spend theri last dime on it. Just not true. I noticed you phrased your post as an opinion...just trying to make you more informed I am pretty sure a ;ot of "stoners" can afford what ever they want.

    And I was also comparing "stoners" to alcoholics, not in the legal sense, but as far as how much money they spend on booz and pot. The alcoholic is much more likely to pawn a gun or something to buy booze than a "stoner". Also, satying away from what is legal and what is not. Alcoholics brain chemistry get out of whack even when not drunk. If they do not get their booze and go into withdrawal they can get erratic. It just irks me when folks dog people that smoke pot from an ethical point of view but think getting bombed is just hunky dory. Just sober up and you are just fine to carry a gun(all of those not aimed at you )
    I appreciate the update. I suppose any opinion could be supported by how functional the user may be and the economic class one may support a habit. One with a higher income could split a bag of dope/bottle of booze with a 9mm while the lower tax bracket may choose the dope/bottle of Booze if only could afford one choice.. I suppose it's not impossible to have functional chemically dependent users who still maintains functional incomes at least for the time being. Please note that alchol is also a chemical so i refer to both alchol and drug users as chemical dependents. Can't say it's a comforting thought of the impaired with the tool to make an instant decision to pull the trigger or not. I don't believe the subject/ individual of the artical encountered this issue. Or at least it wasn't documented they were dependent on anything. In my opinion they just made a mistake at 18. We all have made mistakes. Not all of them legal issues. This shouldn't affect his rights as a gun owner. If habitual then I say yes. Loose the right unless you've demonstrated recovery. Im ok with that. its a disease not a moral issue. I do believe some dependent people don't like it any more that the people affected by it... Thus AA/NA. As far a pawning off property..who is more likely do do it.. I have no supporting documentation to made a definitive statement. I don't believe that matters. If you do I'd like to read up on it. Also, the drug of choice is just that and not revelent. Chemically dependent is chemically dependent. If your dependent on a drug then the need to maintain the level to prevent withdraw is is same. An addicted brain is an addicted brain. I'm not dogging pot smoker over drinkers. I don't condone either. I remember one guy that I worked with several years ago died from alcohol related physical problems. We were all surprised and we didn't even know he drank.. His daughter revealed we may not have known as we just didn't have a comparrison as we never saw him draw a sober breath. I lost my Mom when I was 10 to Alchol. I have encountered some education as to what makes them tick and it irks me too when people think at daily pot smokers aren't addicted just because they haven't encountered any problems yet. They just haven't gotten caught yet. I do agree that Symptoms of Alcholism are more apparent and devastating than pot. Reason.. Alchol has what know as a shorter half life and is water solvable so it breaks down faster that the opiate based pot. Need to drink more to maintain the level of comfortability thus making the symptoms more apparent Possession is still illegal least we forget. How many times do you need to get busted before it becomes a problem. How many times do you get your utilities cut off or don't eat because you bought a bag of pot/bottle of booze instead. How many times did they drive impared and not get caught. Just because you don't get caught doesn't mean it's not an issue. Do I have first had knowledge of the devastating affects of dependency ? Unfortunionally i do. I had to live with it at a very impressionabl age. That why i dont do it and dont condone it. It's the only disease known to man that allows those affected to believe they don't have a problem and its everyone else's fault they are having problems. Reaction is quite different. A doctor tells your a chemical dependent and the patient tells the doctor their crazy. A doctor tells someone they have cancer they ask, Doc what do I do, I'll do anything you say. Enough said
    suntzu likes this.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  10. #25
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Good post...need paragraphs though
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  11. #26
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Just remember, dependent and addicted aren't the same. For example, if you take painkillers for long enough anyone will become dependent and even go through withdrawal. Addiction would be craving it and your life takes a nosedive due to how badly you need it.

    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    The thread wasn't started to debate what makes a habitual user a habitual user. It was, at least as I read, someone getting their gun rights back after committing a misdemeanor. It just happened to be possession of a controlled substance. As far as am aware, smoking pot is still illegal in the eyes of most states and according to the Feds. Smoking it maintains the possession there of. Committing crimes does affect ones legal gun rights. To another poster in this thread. The difference is Alcohol is a legal substance. If the resulting Alcohol usage brought forth legal issues resulting from chronic use or one time stupidity; I guess could result in the same right to own firearms issues. I'm no doctor so I won't debate or be bated into what makes an addict an addict. I only comment on the usage and possession of illegal substances as a crime. I assume if smoking pot were legal then the same legalities like driving under the influence and stoned in public would apply as it does to Alcohol. I would hope so. The degree of the crime is left up to the states and the morality on if smoking pot as a crime is probably left to debated on another forum. Smoking pot may not make a "druggie" but the possession of the controlled substance is a crime. I don't have any pot, my Fridge isn't full of Buds and Wild Turkey still lives in the woods.. I do not use theses products so my vision into the life style and issues created by the life style is rather limit. To be honest about it, want no part of or association with those that do. Being around impaired people has no allure. I have seen others affected by the resulting issues and it doesn't look like any fun. Us old conservatives got old for a reason. We must know something.
    No offense, but I see 60-70 year old alcoholics who do nothing but drink. They've somehow made it that far too, so age doesn't always mean intelligent.
    bombthrower77 likes this.

  12. #27
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,421
    "For example, if you take painkillers for long enough anyone will become dependent and even go through withdrawal. Addiction would be craving it and your life takes a nosedive due to how badly you need it."

    I don't think your differenciation will hold water.
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  13. #28
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by OldVet View Post
    "For example, if you take painkillers for long enough anyone will become dependent and even go through withdrawal. Addiction would be craving it and your life takes a nosedive due to how badly you need it."

    I don't think your differenciation will hold water.
    Hold water...where? It's a well known difference, addiction requires cravings and such. People in chronic pain can take pain meds, improve their quality of life and not become addicted.

  14. #29
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    Just remember, dependent and addicted aren't the same. For example, if you take painkillers for long enough anyone will become dependent and even go through withdrawal. Addiction would be craving it and your life takes a nosedive due to how badly you need it.

    No offense, but I see 60-70 year old alcoholics who do nothing but drink. They've somehow made it that far too, so age doesn't always mean intelligent.
    No offense taken but your giving the impression you think all older conservatives are alcoholics. I'm old and a conservative and I don't touch a drop. If people taking pain killers are no longer in pain and they keep taking the pain killers because they became dependent then they are addicted. I believe your attempting to define the degree of dependency. That's like being pregnant. Either you are or you aren't. You can't be just a little pregnant.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  15. #30
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    No offense taken but your giving the impression you think all older conservatives are alcoholics. I'm old and a conservative and I don't touch a drop. If people taking pain killers are no longer in pain and they keep taking the pain killers because they became dependent then they are addicted. I believe your attempting to define the degree of dependency. That's like being pregnant. Either you are or you aren't. You can't be just a little pregnant.
    I don't know how you took that as such, I said I SEE some 60-70 year old alcoholics. I didn't say most were even.

    Dependence and addiction are different things, you just said "no longer in pain" which is acute pain. Chronic pain doesn't go away, ergo, you keep taking them. Obviously if the pain doesn't exist and you keep taking them, it's addiction.

    It's well known in the medical community.

    Discovery Health "Addiction v. Dependence on Pain Medications"

    "Pain doctors have known for years that taking opioids over long periods of time for medical reasons does not have to lead to addiction. More than a decade ago, neurologist Russell Portenoy, who was most recently President of the American Pain Society, reviewed studies of almost 25,000 cancer patients. Most of those patients had been on opioid therapy for many years. Of the whole group, very few showed any signs of drug abuse, drug craving, or drug-seeking behavior.

    Every one of these cancer patients was dependent on their medication. However, their physical needs were worlds away from addiction. Addiction is a biological and psychological condition that compels a person to satisfy their need for a particular stimulus and to keep satisfying it, no matter what.

    It is a compulsive behavior that demands more and more drugs, regardless of the consequences that lead to dysfunction. A person who is addicted to opioids has a disease that undermines optimal function and drives one to compulsively use a drug, despite the negative consequences.

    The pain patient who is effectively treated with opioids finds life restored-even if he is dependent on them. With the pain muted by stable and steady controlled use of long-acting opioids, a patient can reclaim his life, go back to work, return to family life, and pursue favorite pastimes. Dependence is a physical state that occurs when the lack of a drug causes the body to have a reaction. Physical dependence is solely a physical state indicating that the body has grown so adapted to having the drug present that sudden removal of it will lead to negative consequences such as a withdrawal reaction. This can occur with almost any kind of drug.

    A good example of dependence is a heavy coffee drinker's use of caffeine. If you are used to drinking several cups of coffee each day, you soon learn about physical dependence when you miss a day or two. This does not mean you are addicted to the caffeine; it only means your body is surprised not to see what it has come to expect.

    In the case of opioids, a certain amount taken every day fills the glass, and no more may be needed or desired. If the medication is removed, the consequences are physical (sweating, running nose, diarrhea, racing heart, or nausea), not psychological."

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

blackmarket gun permits

,
can i have a ccw and a medical marijuna card in michigan
,
can i have a medical marijuana card and a ccw
,
can i in michigan purchase a handgun if i carry a medical marauana card
,
can you have a medical merijuana card and a concield carry handgun card at the same time in michigan
,

did the election in november make it legal to have a ccw and a medical marijuana card in michigan

,
florida concealed carry marijuana
,
marijuana misdemeanor conviction massachusetts license to carry
,
medical marihuana and cpl
,
medical marijuana and michigan cpl
,
michigan ccw and medical marijuana card
,
why cant i possess a medical marihuana card and a ccw
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors