• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hawaii gun confiscation, we knew it! [W:357]

I want to legalize pot and Im not a leftist. However...its undeniable that there ARE anti-gun leftists that will use any angle they can find to try to attack gun ownership. I dont think you can throw that broad a net over the topic of drug legalization.

It also is a tremendously hypocritical act. If they are going to take away their guns because they are too dangerous to be around guns, then surely they should take away cars, access to children, etc.
 
TurtleDude said:
or that the specific section of 4473 can be answered negatively by those with medical weed.

the ideal solution would be for the USSC to actually start being honest and stating that NO, the COMMERCE CLAUSE doesn't give congress any power in this area
Click to expand...

And no the 4473 cannot be answered negatively by those with medical weed. It’s still against federal law. Note that the latest 4473 form even points that out.

http://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download


It’s not just the commerce clause though it’s our treaty which really drives the federal law
 
Crovax said:
And no the 4473 cannot be answered negatively by those with medical weed. It’s still against federal law. Note that the latest 4473 form even points that out.

http://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download


It’s not just the commerce clause though it’s our treaty which really drives the federal law
Click to expand...

its the commerce clause idiocy that created this dishonest federal gun control law
 
Crovax said:
Ahh my mistake, thought you were talking about the drug laws
Click to expand...

much of the federal drug laws is based on the FDR idiocy. I am looking forward to various states-often liberal run that legalize pop forcing a conflict with the federal government by telling the feds that they cannot try to override legalization within the state. I'd like to see a constitutional crisis from that which might result in the idiocy of WICKARD being rolled way back. Dope grown in Colorado for consumption in colorado should be off limits for the feds. Just like a machine gun made in Montana or a SBR or suppressor made in Ohio that does not leave the respective state should not be controlled by any federal law
 
TurtleDude said:
much of the federal drug laws is based on the FDR idiocy. I am looking forward to various states-often liberal run that legalize pop forcing a conflict with the federal government by telling the feds that they cannot try to override legalization within the state. I'd like to see a constitutional crisis from that which might result in the idiocy of WICKARD being rolled way back. Dope grown in Colorado for consumption in colorado should be off limits for the feds. Just like a machine gun made in Montana or a SBR or suppressor made in Ohio that does not leave the respective state should not be controlled by any federal law
Click to expand...
Now that is a real pipe dream
 
vegas giants said:
Now that is a real pipe dream
Click to expand...

thank you for that opinion. It will be fun watching liberal pot heads and conservative pro gun patriots uniting against your beloved Wickard fascism
 
American said:
I was told by a doctor, who prescribed a oxy-type drug, that if I take it, I'm legally drunk.
Click to expand...

If you get drunk on alcohol, you are not prohibited from owning a car. Just driving it.
 
Bodhisattva said:
It says: Section 134-7(a) of Hawaii's Revised Statutes, which says "no person who is a fugitive from justice or is a person prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition under federal law shall own, possess, or control any firearm or ammunition." The relevant federal provision prohibits possession of firearms by anyone who is "an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance."
Click to expand...

Sorry, should have been clearer. What I meant to suggest was a sarcastic 'oh, but alcohol is ok to use and have a gun'.
 
TurtleDude said:
much of the federal drug laws is based on the FDR idiocy. I am looking forward to various states-often liberal run that legalize pop forcing a conflict with the federal government by telling the feds that they cannot try to override legalization within the state. I'd like to see a constitutional crisis from that which might result in the idiocy of WICKARD being rolled way back. Dope grown in Colorado for consumption in colorado should be off limits for the feds. Just like a machine gun made in Montana or a SBR or suppressor made in Ohio that does not leave the respective state should not be controlled by any federal law
Click to expand...

You must be one of those crazies that believe in the Constitution. :lol:
 
Tigerace117 said:
Better start shooting at police officers and US troops like y'all have been fantasizing about for decades now.
Click to expand...

What planet did you just drop in off of? I never heard crazy talk like that before.
 
ludin said:
Or wimply don't use pot. Ol my people can't get stoned.
This is a federal government law not a state law.

If you are addicted or on a controlled substance you cannot have a fire Arm.
Click to expand...

My problem with this is, I think they're using this to confiscate weapons. Now I can drink alcohol and own a weapon, but not if I have pot. There's an unfair contradiction going on there.
 
American said:
Hawaii, Which Registers Guns and Medical Marijuana Users, Starts Disarming Patients - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Just as we always thought. The Left are lying sacks of ****, gun confiscators! No wonder they want a legalize pot. Hawaii, is anyone surprise by this state?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Don't you think it's worth mentioning that they are merely confiscating guns from people who are using illegal drugs? I agree that the way they are doing this, by going after medical marijuana users, this is silly and isn't making anyone safer in my opinion, but they aren't just going around confiscating everyone's guns. And if I'm reading the article correctly people have the choice of getting rid of their medical marijuana and keeping their gun, as you can do oe or the other, just not both. I think it's silly, but this isn't what you're trying to fear monger.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Don't you think it's worth mentioning that they are merely confiscating guns from people who are using illegal drugs? I agree that the way they are doing this, by going after medical marijuana users, this is silly and isn't making anyone safer in my opinion, but they aren't just going around confiscating everyone's guns. And if I'm reading the article correctly people have the choice of getting rid of their medical marijuana and keeping their gun, as you can do oe or the other, just not both. I think it's silly, but this isn't what you're trying to fear monger.
Click to expand...

The fact that they are confiscating guns at all is the point; we have a ****ing 2nd Amendment ya know?
 
roughdraft274 said:
Don't you think it's worth mentioning that they are merely confiscating guns from people who are using illegal drugs? I agree that the way they are doing this, by going after medical marijuana users, this is silly and isn't making anyone safer in my opinion, but they aren't just going around confiscating everyone's guns. And if I'm reading the article correctly people have the choice of getting rid of their medical marijuana and keeping their gun, as you can do oe or the other, just not both. I think it's silly, but this isn't what you're trying to fear monger.
Click to expand...

Why aren't they arresting people for using illegal drugs?
 
TurtleDude said:
this will have to be resolved by either congress or the supreme court

if you are a gun owner and you are prescribed Oxy for chronic pain, you are not disbarred from owning a firearm. however, if a doctor prescribes weed for say glaucoma, the fascists want to ban you from owning a gun. its idiotic. as long as you aren't stoned on Oxy or weed when you are shooting, there should be no ban
Click to expand...

You mean if you illegally use schedule one controlled substances to get High because of imagined medical conditions you are subject to the drug user gun ban just like any other drug user. You’re a lawyer, you know full well that marijuana is Schedule 1, state law has no authority, doctors cannot legally prescribe it, your prescription is not a defense to that charge, and any hypotheticals involving opioids when legally prescribed or use of alcohol which is unscheduled is entirely irrelevant.
 
TurtleDude said:
so you don't drive while under the influence. doesn't disbar you from owning a gun, merely using it while under the influence.
Click to expand...

Nor are you barred from owing a vehicule
 
Rucker61 said:
Why aren't they arresting people for using illegal drugs?
Click to expand...

Like I said, and pointed out very clearly so as to avoid dull questions such as you have presented, I don't agree with how they are handling this. But apparently they have a state law saying if you have a card you can use this illegal drug and we won't arrest you, but the drug is still technically illegal under federal law. They also have a law saying you cant own a handgun AND be using illegal drugs. The police are looking at the state laws on the books and since police enforce laws, not right them, they feel that they are following the state law, and I'm not 100% sure that they aren't. I'm far from an expert on such tricky matters. I was merely pointing out that I think if you see this and just start screaming "confiscation!" without understanding and explaining the details that the person is engaging in intellectually dishonest discourse and playing on people's irrational fear.
 
American said:
The fact that they are confiscating guns at all is the point; we have a ****ing 2nd Amendment ya know?
Click to expand...

You say that as though you honestly think that just saying "2nd Amendment ya know?" is an argument. You live in a country where the courts and the states and the citizens all agree that not everyone should own a gun. Felons, people in jail, mentally retarded etc. Just stating the amendment like that shows me, I think plenty clear enough, what you're motives are. You don't want the facts, you don't want the details. You want to kick and scream and throw a tantrum. I'll leave you to it.
 
American said:
My problem with this is, I think they're using this to confiscate weapons. Now I can drink alcohol and own a weapon, but not if I have pot. There's an unfair contradiction going on there.
Click to expand...

Then blame federal law. It has nothing to do with liberals or Hawaii. It has to do with federal law.
Alcohol is not a controlled substance pot is, and that is where the conflict arises.
 
roughdraft274 said:
You say that as though you honestly think that just saying "2nd Amendment ya know?" is an argument. You live in a country where the courts and the states and the citizens all agree that not everyone should own a gun. Felons, people in jail, mentally retarded etc. Just stating the amendment like that shows me, I think plenty clear enough, what you're motives are. You don't want the facts, you don't want the details. You want to kick and scream and throw a tantrum. I'll leave you to it.
Click to expand...

So it's quite okay for YOU that we begin a confiscation process. Thank you for letting me know where you really stand on guns. No only do you support confiscation, but you support special circumstances and uneven enforcement of law. You don't have any facts on your side, not even the stupid suicide and crime reduction facts support you. My motives are equal rights under the law, and a vehement respect for the Constitution. The fact that you have two TD quotes in your signature proves your a thorough gun hater, so I'll leave you to it. Hate away, no one is listening.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Don't you think it's worth mentioning that they are merely confiscating guns from people who are using illegal drugs? I agree that the way they are doing this, by going after medical marijuana users, this is silly and isn't making anyone safer in my opinion, but they aren't just going around confiscating everyone's guns. And if I'm reading the article correctly people have the choice of getting rid of their medical marijuana and keeping their gun, as you can do oe or the other, just not both. I think it's silly, but this isn't what you're trying to fear monger.
Click to expand...

I think the point here is that they are using their unique position of requiring everyone to register their firearms as a means to confiscate them. Which liberals claim wouldnt happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom