Posted on 12/20/2011 6:30:01 PM PST by neverdem
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to prohibit patients from protecting themselves.
If you are a medical marijuana patient in one of the 16 states (plus the District of Columbia) that allow for it, you’ve got reason to believe lately that the government has it in for you.
You’ve got federal raids on the places where you can conveniently buy your medicine, the governor of Arizona trying to overturn in court her citizens’ choice to institute a medical marijuana system, and Michigan’s attorney general trying to make life as hard as he can for those using the system his state’s voters approved by 63 percent in 2008. And while it isn’t directly the government’s fault, doctors are taking people off liver transplant waiting lists for using medical pot.
It isn’t just that the government on both the federal and state level doesn’t want you to be able to legally and conveniently obtain your medicine, if that medicine is pot. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) insists you inherently lose a key constitutional right merely by letting your state know you might want to take pot medicinally.
Merely having a state medical marijuana card, BATFE insists, means that you fall afoul of Sect. 922(g) of the federal criminal code (from the 1968 federal Gun Control Act), which says that anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” is basically barred from possessing or receiving guns or ammo (with the bogus assertion that such possession implicates interstate commerce, which courts will pretty much always claim it does).
Nevada licenses medical pot users. Rowan Wilson, a Carson City-area woman who works as a medical technician in residential care homes, believes pot might be useful for her painful menstrual cramps. After going through…...
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Regarding the prescription drugs, there are a great many prescription drugs that are doled out every day to Americans that are Schedule 2 or Schedule 3 controlled substances regulated by the DEA. Some of these, like narcotic painkillers, will effect you in almost exactly the same way as Schedule 1 substances like heroin or morphine, that are in the same category as marijuana. A lot of prescription drugs are definitely addictive and widely abused. Even widely used non-narcotic psychiatric drugs like Ritalin are on the schedules, addictive, and can have similar effects to drugs such as methamphetamine. So, your fears about them using this as a backdoor method of gun control sound pretty reasonable to me.
Also, besides this drug restriction, there is the long-standing restriction placed on people with psychiatric problems. Right now, I think you have to have been institutionalized or something for these restrictions to kick in, but is it crazy to think that the government will try to widen that restriction too? Am I paranoid for thinking that the boom in handing out prescription antidepressants to a swathe of the population is a really convenient event for people who would like to ban guns for people who had been just treated for mental issues or prescribed psychiatric medication?
What other drugs would this apply to? Xanax, Prozac, Ritalin? Any of a hundred other mood altering drugs?
It is the recipe for tyranny. When anyone can be charged with a crime everyone has to live in fear. All the police have to do is randomly pick folks up. The smart ones will plead out quickly just to be on to whatever is next.
Given your screen name, what about fins? And teeth?
Cheers!
But those aren't the ones I'd bet most users are after...
“The sheer number and volume of laws is ridiculous, and you’re spot on about their purpose as a path to the police state, whether it was intentional or not. Lawmakers get paid to make laws, they get publicity for their re-election when they pass laws, and they get more croney jobs to hand out to their buddies with every law they have to enforce. So, it doesn’t even take a conspriratioral mindset to conclude that politicians will just keep making laws until everyone is a criminal if nobody stops them, and I think we’re already pass that point....”
ARBEITSZIEHUNGSLAGER
And it’s much cheaper than a trip to Jamaica.
I think that’s the way the Nazi’s did it.
In fact, all of them that I know think those who support such interpretation of the law are their mortal enemies.
Both Silberman and Sutton cited Scalia's opinion in 2005 upholding strict federal regulation of marijuana in the case of Angel Raich, a Californian who used home-grown marijuana to relieve her pain. "If Congress could regulate Angel Raich when she grew marijuana on her property for self-consumption," Sutton wrote, "it is difficult to say Congress may not regulate the 50 million Americans who self-finance their medical care."
http://mobile.latimes.com/p.p?a=rp&m=b&postId=1165037
0bama and Democrats in general are far too socialist and Tyrannical, this being apparent long before the 2008 election occurred.
Any so-called libertarian who would vote for such a blatant authoritarian collectivist is no libertarian at all...
Shouting at your spouse can get your 2A rights wiped out.
Same if you ever get any psychological counseling. They’re using that one with a lot of ex-military.
Our state once had a chief medical examiner who simply made shit up to ensure convictions. His paid testimony sent hundreds to prison and many convictions were overturned years later when it was found that he didn’t have a college degree and had not even performed the tests that he used to convict people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Zain
http://truthinjustice.org/expertslie.htm
http://www.corpus-delicti.com/zain_082194.html
These bureaucrats just nailed some company for putting on their water bottle that it prevents dehydration (making it a drug).
Of course they want to get everyone and everything on ridiculous technicalities. They let the real abusers free. They may actually be sticking up for them. You little peons though, no, they will clampy down on you and crush you with every technicality they can find.
I hate stoners. I hater more the batf.
Somehow I just know that Antonin Scalia will figure out a way to justifiably rule against Obamacare. Don’t you worry about it.
You’re worried about that, when about 40 percent of everyone driving around you is high on some type of concocted big pharma drugs.
A big percentage of people over 65 are strung out on pharmaceutical pain killers, medications etc, with many ingesting multiple pain killers and medications as a matter of routine. It’s what made big pharma worth hundreds of billions.
...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.
J. Scalia concurring in Raich
BINGO!
She don't even have to show them a bruise...Just a slight red mark will do....And they'll throw you in a cage, and strip your rights away...You're done!
Total 100 percent control.
Go big gov!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.