[hinckley buzzard]

Longstanding rule upheld by courts for many years--users of illegal drugs are not entitled to own firearms.

Pot is a federally proscribed drug, so possession and use negates the right to own a firearm. Simple and well known, and predictable to anyone who has ever thought about the realities of sucking pot behind a "prescription."

[wastoute]

Read it carefully. Anyone “addicted” (read regularly taking) a controlled substance... Like Tylenol #3? Adderall? It doesn’t limit the proscrption to ILLEGAL drugs. How many of you saying, “Yeah, those dope smokers shouldn’t have rights to arms” take a legal controlled substance?

[OneWingedShark]

>Longstanding rule upheld by courts for many years--users of illegal drugs are not entitled to own firearms.

Entitled? Is the 2nd Amendment part of the Bill of Entitlements?

>Pot is a federally proscribed drug, so possession and use negates the right to own a firearm.

Is this before a trial? Or should we just scrap the fourth & sixth amendments?

>Simple and well known, and predictable to anyone who has ever thought about the realities of sucking pot behind a "prescription."

I'm not a pot-smoker, never appealed to me, but it is absolutely intolerable what the "Ware on Drugs" has don (and is doing) to the Bill of Rights as-written and as-applied.

[Talisker]

Pot is a federally proscribed drug, so possession and use negates the right to own a firearm. Simple and well known, and predictable to anyone who has ever thought about the realities of sucking pot behind a "prescription."

Bet you lay awake at night wondering why the Founders ever even bothered creating things called "States," eh?

How annoying for you, when with one smoooooth federal overlay, things could be put right once and for all - eh?