[IrishCop]

ATF Tells Gun Dealers They Can't Sell To Medical Marijuana Patients | Fox News

I am not advocating the use of marijuana in any way shape or form. But this directive from ATF is an affront to logic. (nothing new there)

Persons using medical marijuana are doing so legally in their respective states (not an option here in Alabama). Although there are surely abuses of the system, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Americans who are using and abusing a long list of prescription drugs; opiates, anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, etc. Most of these are just as powerful, if not more so, than marijuana. No directive from the ATF to check customers prescription records for any number of these mood altering substances (Thank God!). And what are dealers suppose to do? Pat there customers down for rolling papers and roach clips?

Morons.

 

[TommyGunn]

Bad
Attitude
Toward
Freedom

Medical marijuana is being severely abused in California (surprise surprise); all you need to do is go to a doctor and claim you have recurring headaches, he writes out a scrip and you go nextdoor to Maryjane's Wonder Emporium and get your weed.
The DEA has so badly cowed doctors that they are reluctant to properly manage pain ... so we have this marijuana controversy where, supposedly, it "manages" pain.
And maybe it does.
But the BATF is being a bit too procrustean here, OMHO.
It's a good thing marijuana doesn't come with a string or it might be considered an illegal full-auto device and that WOULD BE BAD.mg:

My first year of college at the University of South Florida a friend lived just off campus in a duplex. His neighbors were HEAVY marijuana users. And the yard outside absolutly REEKED of that rather distinctive odor.
I know peple don't use it because it smells good, because it DOESN'T. It smells horrible. YUCK. I hope I never come down with a chronic condition for which the only stuff I can get for it is MJ. ICK.
Just buy me a wheelbarrow full of ibuprofen.:dunno::cryinlaugh:

 

[IrishCop]

It is a distinctive and unforgettable odor, Tommy. No doubt about it. And I do have my reservations about the legitimate medical benefits of marijuana. But I'm not a scientist, soooo....

I do have some personal knowledge concerning the long term use of prescription pain killers.

I was on one or another strength of Lortabs for about six months. They work. They make intense pain bearable, and moderate pain disappear. BUT, if you don't have an ethical physician, like I did, who recognizes the risk versus the benefit, you can end up with one helluva monkey on your back.

My Doc weened me off of them. I now take a non-narcotic drug which limits nerve pain (electric shock-like jolts that'll wake you up at night) and Tylenol. I still have pain, sometimes quite severe, and probably always will. I just had to man up and deal with it.

And since I'm already fatter than George Soros' wallet, the last thing I need is a drug that'll give me the munchies.

 

[Retmsgt.]

I'm kinda confused about this, I would think the use of Medical Weed would fall under the pervue of the DEA, not the ATFE. Unless they're regulating it like Cigarettes the ATF would have no jurisdiction that I could fathom.

 

[bearcat6]

A sheriff here in Oregon revoked a woman's carry permit because she got a medical marijuana card. She took it to court, the judge said the sheriff had to give it back, that he couldn't pull it because she got the card. What confuses me about this is one of the questions on the 4473 when you buy a gun asks if you are addicted to or a user of marijuans. I would think a yes answer would disqualify you.

 

[Tim Burke]

Unlawful user or addicted, IIRC.

 

[IrishCop]

Unlawful user or addicted, IIRC.

That's my recollection too, Tim. And kinda the whole point of this thread.

What about those taking other controlled substances via prescription? Are those persons the next in line for "screening" by the BATFE? I understand that the federal government doesn't recognize medically prescribed marijuana. But that hasn't stopped various states from approving it's use, and apparently without any real backlash.

The only logical avenues open to the Feds are to either force the state approved outlets to close shop, or deny anyone legally prescribed a controlled substance the right to purchase a firearm.

 

[WaltGraham]

Are you not compromised even if you're a lawful user?

I can be lawfully consuming alcoholic beverages but still considered to be a lawbreaker if I take a single drink while lawfully armed (at least by local statute).

I guess we can call BS on this on a number of different levels.

 

[stand watie]

to all,

personally, i think that the USA would be FAR better off W/O the BATFE & patients should be treated as their physician(s) deem best, after consultation with the patient. ====> the [email protected]#$% federal government & the [email protected]#$%^ bureaucrats should BUTT OUT!

let me give you an example: i had an Army buddy, who was in late stage IV with cancer of the pancreas & who had been told to "go home & get your affairs in order", as he was expected to live maybe as much as 90 days.

instead, Tommy, beleiving that he had NOTHING to lose, went to Mexico & was treated with LAETRILE (UN-lawful in the USA, as it is UN-proven against cancer). = he died about 8 years later of HEART FAILURE.
(given his choice, would you like to have 8 more reasonably healthy years of life?)


yours, sw

 

[IrishCop]

Are you not compromised even if you're a lawful user?

I can be lawfully consuming alcoholic beverages but still considered to be a lawbreaker if I take a single drink while lawfully armed (at least by local statute).

I guess we can call BS on this on a number of different levels.

You bet, Walt. But the 4473 doesn't ask if you're high or drunk at the time of purchase; just if you are addicted to or abuse said substances.

The form itself is just feel-good BS. The purchaser is asked to honestly answer questions which would deny him/her the sale.

Hell, if you lie, you fly.

I haven't got the answer. Authorize MORE intrusions into our private lives to allow more "thorough" checks of potential gun buyers? Might sound OK to some, but I'm leery. Or just say ally, ally in-come-free and sell anybody a firearm? I could argue either side of that one, too. :dunno::help:

 

[WaltGraham]

The form itself is just feel-good BS. The purchaser is asked to honestly answer questions which would deny him/her the sale.

I was thinking more about my gubmint permit to carry. In VA you can now actually go into a restaurant that serves alcohol and carry concealed. Of course, you can't imbibe while doing so but you could, were you so boneheaded, get hammered if you were openly carrying. Officers of the court can carry concealed and drink as much as they like, while I'm prohibited from having a single beer with dinner. My only other option in that case is to leave my weapon in my car; and that's not going to happen. I'd just like to see some common sense standards for everyone.

 

[guntotin_fool]

Some states ( Minnesota for one) allows a .04 limit for carry. so far in close to ten years it's not an issue.

As to the whole 4473 issue, somewhere the Fifth Amendment guarantees against self incrimination kick in.

Lastly. I have never seen a stoner had enough motivation for Anything except a midnight trip to taco hell.

 

[IrishCop]

Some states ( Minnesota for one) allows a .04 limit for carry. so far in close to ten years it's not an issue.

As to the whole 4473 issue, somewhere the Fifth Amendment guarantees against self incrimination kick in.

Lastly. I have never seen a stoner had enough motivation for Anything except a midnight trip to taco hell.

Your right, there. I have never had to fight a pothead. They were too busy trying to hit Waffle House for some scattered, smothered and covered. Now drunks and methheads are a whole 'nother story.

 

[IrishCop]

to all,

personally, i think that the USA would be FAR better off W/O the BATFE & patients should be treated as their physician(s) deem best, after consultation with the patient. ====> the [email protected]#$% federal government & the [email protected]#$%^ bureaucrats should BUTT OUT!

let me give you an example: i had an Army buddy, who was in late stage IV with cancer of the pancreas & who had been told to "go home & get your affairs in order", as he was expected to live maybe as much as 90 days.

instead, Tommy, beleiving that he had NOTHING to lose, went to Mexico & was treated with LAETRILE (UN-lawful in the USA, as it is UN-proven against cancer). = he died about 8 years later of HEART FAILURE.
(given his choice, would you like to have 8 more reasonably healthy years of life?)

yours, sw

SW, my Dad passed away from pancreatic cancer this year. He fought it for two years, with surgery (the Whipple procedure where they remove most of the pancreas and re-route a lot of the digestive track). A very invasive procedure with a lot of nasty side effects. It bought him about a year, then the cancer reoccurred. He fought with chemo and radiation, then finally called it quits.

I wish he would have at least had the option to try laetrile. I miss him.

 

[stand watie]

IrishCop,

i'm truly SORRY about your dad's demise.

yours, sw