I can spend half my paycheck buying enough whiskey to pickle an elephant and the other half buying a gun... I can even have all those bottles of whiskey in my car when I pull into the gun store parking lot to go buy the latest and greatest scary, black, semi-auto death machine...

And as long as I am not slurring my speech, stumbling around, and reeking of booze I can buy a firearm.

Why don't we just add a field sobriety test, BAC, and pee test, on top of the background check? If the tests show any traces of anything, booze, dope, prescription meds, you're denied.

Reckon that will stop gun crime and keep criminals from getting guns?

Mike

Just because it's "illegal" in some states doesn't mean it gets prosecuted. Lots of things are illegal that never get enforced.

I know a guy who legally arrested a guy with 252 lbs of marijuana. Prosecutor said "meh...it's only weed".

Locally our mayor stopped the police from arresting people (well OK...just the black people) for selling weed on the street corner.

So yeah...it's illegal...but not really.

So there ya go.

Why did they keep arresting the white people ?

Missouri Just passed medical mj under certain medical circumstances.
I said this very thing before it passed.. Anyone that has a condition that qualifies and gets the card, will not be able to purchase a gun any longer. Still illegal on the Fed level.

^ but it's lying.

^ but it's lying.

Don't give anyone any ideas!

I don't see a problem.its a simple choice-which is more important to you -having a gun or getting stoned stupid.Can't do both,legally(unless your Canadian)

...to the government.

Boco so do you think a terminally ill person who gets a green card to have some comfort in death gives up their right to defend what life they have left if say someone breaks in? Don't seem right to me. Maybe if you have a loved one who can ONLY get relief from mj you might change your mind. Handful of narcotics which just incapacitate you don't stop the pain or a few puffs of a plant you grew for them (cause you loved them regardless of the law) which gave them REAL RELIEF and allowed them to enjoy life again for their final days. That's huge for someone who had spent over a year incapacitated most days with pain. Does a lot to change ones perspective on this plant. I don't believe someone should be forced to choose between protecting their life but not being able to live it and being able to live what's left but not being allowed to protect it.

I'd support legalization if you can help me out in one area.

Johnny likes to have a drink at night before bed. He pours his whiskey, enjoys it while watching tv, and then goes to bed. The next day, Johnny goes to work and has an accident on his forklift in the warehouse. Immediately, they are going to draw blood to check for intoxication for liability reasons. This determines if Johnny was sober at the time of the accident. His blood is clean, and all is well in that area. Insurance covers his medical costs and work deals with it how they will.

Bobby likes to smoke pot. He does it often, but never on the job. Bobby smokes a joint, goes to bed. The next day, same warehouse, Bobby has an accident. They immediately draw his blood to check for intoxication for liability reasons. This determines if Bobby was sober at the time of the accident. Bobby's blood isn't clean, it shows levels of THC. All is not well. Bobby isn't covered by insurance, and work fires him. Why? Because you can't prove that Bobby wasn't high at the time of the accident.

Transfer this to any situation really in the work place, or even in terms of gun related incidents. Show me a test that will prove his is or is NOT high at the moment things happened, I'll get on board. Until then. No. Our nation is built on a structure of laws and liability. Doesn't matter if you don't like it or don't approve it is what it is. Until you can address this factor, legalizing is going to create more problems than it solves.

I'd support legalization if you can help me out in one area.

Johnny likes to have a drink at night before bed. He pours his whiskey, enjoys it while watching tv, and then goes to bed. The next day, Johnny goes to work and has an accident on his forklift in the warehouse. Immediately, they are going to draw blood to check for intoxication for liability reasons. This determines if Johnny was sober at the time of the accident. His blood is clean, and all is well in that area. Insurance covers his medical costs and work deals with it how they will.

Bobby likes to smoke pot. He does it often, but never on the job. Bobby smokes a joint, goes to bed. The next day, same warehouse, Bobby has an accident. They immediately draw his blood to check for intoxication for liability reasons. This determines if Bobby was sober at the time of the accident. Bobby's blood isn't clean, it shows levels of THC. All is not well. Bobby isn't covered by insurance, and work fires him. Why? Because you can't prove that Bobby wasn't high at the time of the accident.

Transfer this to any situation really in the work place, or even in terms of gun related incidents. Show me a test that will prove his is or is NOT high at the moment things happened, I'll get on board. Until then. No. Our nation is built on a structure of laws and liability. Doesn't matter if you don't like it or don't approve it is what it is. Until you can address this factor, legalizing is going to create more problems than it solves.

James I seem to recall reading that NRA was the author of the anti gun rights laws we have now, why would they change to a gun rights organization for this?

I'd support legalization if you can help me out in one area.

Johnny likes to have a drink at night before bed. He pours his whiskey, enjoys it while watching tv, and then goes to bed. The next day, Johnny goes to work and has an accident on his forklift in the warehouse. Immediately, they are going to draw blood to check for intoxication for liability reasons. This determines if Johnny was sober at the time of the accident. His blood is clean, and all is well in that area. Insurance covers his medical costs and work deals with it how they will.

Bobby likes to smoke pot. He does it often, but never on the job. Bobby smokes a joint, goes to bed. The next day, same warehouse, Bobby has an accident. They immediately draw his blood to check for intoxication for liability reasons. This determines if Bobby was sober at the time of the accident. Bobby's blood isn't clean, it shows levels of THC. All is not well. Bobby isn't covered by insurance, and work fires him. Why? Because you can't prove that Bobby wasn't high at the time of the accident.

Transfer this to any situation really in the work place, or even in terms of gun related incidents. Show me a test that will prove his is or is NOT high at the moment things happened, I'll get on board. Until then. No. Our nation is built on a structure of laws and liability. Doesn't matter if you don't like it or don't approve it is what it is. Until you can address this factor, legalizing is going to create more problems than it solves.

Businesses and insurance can work out these details without government intervention. In fact, while government has been interventing by keeping it illegal the business and insurance hasn't had to work out a solution to the problem.

Absolutely not Finn, I will never condone creating a problem and then assuming someone else will fix it the way "it should be fixed". That literally is the equivalent of " Pass the healthcare bill now and read it later"


Matt28, There may be such a test, but I am unaware of it, please educate me.

Actually, I don't understand why some of these anti-gun regulations were not address when Republicans controlled both houses of congress (Along with concealed carry reciprocity.) With the Democrats in charge now in the House, it may be too late.

Here, I thought of a solution to the problem in about 15 seconds of thought; Businesses can make their own decisions about policies concerning drug use of their employees.

There ya go again... Spouting that dad-blamed free market nonsense.

( I actually alluded to that a few posts back. It's OK though... I forgive you)

Mike

Perhaps you should set in the back.