If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
But wouldn't a medical MJ card go from being proof of use of an unlawful drug to being proof of legal use of MJ?Under federal law, schedule III drugs require a prescription, so the 4473 can stick with the "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?" wording.
Many for this are already dem voters. Trump voters arent going to switch. If anything, what's their motivation to vote for him if this is their one issue?He’s getting desperate for young votes. This is pretty half assed though.
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data". There is a stunning lack of valid studies showing either medical benefts or safety.... it had all these medical benefits, safety profile ......
Who's going do a peer-reviewed study on a schedule 1 controlled substance? Any studies on injecting heroin?There is a stunning lack of valid studies showing either medical benefts or safety.
Not exactly true....NH has been trying to pass rec MJ for years but some of the biggest holdouts and nay votes were dems and dem governors...hell, even nunu said he'd sign a law allowing rec MJ if it came to his desk after a lot of arm twisting.Many for this are already dem voters. Trump voters arent going to switch. If anything, what's their motivation to vote for him if this is their one issue?
Better he kept it in his pocket and whipped it out in october or something.
It's not Schedule 1 on a worldwide basis, so that would not be a valid point for a lack of studies.Who's going do a peer-reviewed study on a schedule 1 controlled substance?
Sure.Any studies on injecting heroin?
So now the federal government needs to defend their position on why it was schedule 1 to begin with, and why they insisted on keeping it schedule 1 for a century KNOWING that it had all these medical benefits, safety profile, and several states fully legalizing it for medical and recreational use. Why NOW? Before everyone starts celebrating, I think we should grill the federal government with questions and accountability first.
Also, OP don't post a CNN link ever again.
A few weeks ago I was in Boston and walking towards city hall. There was a guy walking in front of me smoking a joint while walking through city hall plaza like it was commonplace. We are already there, the law is behind the times.As much as I hate weed the laws against it are just stupid.
That said, I think they should legalize it but if you find some a-hole smoking it outside of work or in his car or while out shopping, you can smack him in the head no more than 3 times with a wooden baseball bat. (Aluminum would be excessive.)
WTF is wrong with people??? Is weed THAT addictive? Does your life suck THAT much. Damn. People didn't closet-drink that much. Now some tool that didn't as much toke a joint 5 years ago can't go 30 minutes without sparking up. This country is doomed. Damn. And I'd love to blame the Gen-Z and younger Millenials, but more often than not it's some 40-yo loser.
Baseball bats. I think of how much upper-body conditioning I'd get.
Never happen. It will be in the same "Department" of things that won't apologize for f***ing up covid and being completely wrong. Gov doesn't like being made sport of.So now the federal government needs to defend their position on why it was schedule 1 to begin with, and why they insisted on keeping it schedule 1 for a century KNOWING that it had all these medical benefits, safety profile, and several states fully legalizing it for medical and recreational use. Why NOW? Before everyone starts celebrating, I think we should grill the federal government with questions and accountability first.
Then why has the Federal Government has a Compassionate Investigational New Drug program, established in 1978, allowed patients with serious medical conditions to receive a regular supply of cannabis from the federal government? Not a lot of people on the program, but it did/does existThe plural of "anecdote" is not "data". There is a stunning lack of valid studies showing either medical benefts or safety.
Didn't a recent study show nobody is in Federal prison, nor any New England state prison, solely for possession of "personal use" amounts of weed?What happens to the thousands in prison for weed possession/distribution??
…Does your life suck THAT much. Damn. People didn't closet-drink that much. …
And you will note the work "Investigational" in the title of the program. They were responding to anecdotes with an aim to seeing if there was some there there. As the program has now collapsed to a handful of participants, it would seem that there was no there there.Then why has the Federal Government has a Compassionate Investigational New Drug program, established in 1978, allowed patients with serious medical conditions to receive a regular supply of cannabis from the federal government? Not a lot of people on the program, but it did/does exist
Many for this are already dem voters. Trump voters arent going to switch. If anything, what's their motivation to vote for him if this is their one issue?
Better he kept it in his pocket and whipped it out in october or something.
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data". There is a stunning lack of valid studies showing either medical benefts or safety.
Cite away.Er... this isn't true.
[Hunter Biden has joined the chat]Anyone want to make a little wager that not only will the ATF do nothing when it comes to updating 4473 but the Biden admin will say that keeping it on the 4473 does not infringe on 2A to deny a weed smoker a gun.
The question merely implements underlying federal law, thus the question on the 4473 is "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?" will stand, though the explanation around it might need another rewrite, but the question itself stands.Because after all this is the exact same DOJ that right now, today, in a 922g1 case is actually arguing that people who smoke MJ are fiends and mentally inferior.
DOJ has successfully argued that 922(g)(3) applies to everybody "addicted to ...a controlled substance", even if obtained under a prescription, going so far as to argue that a prescription for SUBOXONE® or methadone (any drug designated for the treatment of opioid dependence) is prima facia evidence of narcotic addiction.But wouldn't a medical MJ card go from being proof of use of an unlawful drug to being proof of legal use of MJ?
A few weeks ago I was in Boston and walking towards city hall. There was a guy walking in front of me smoking a joint while walking through city hall plaza like it was commonplace. We are already there, the law is behind the times.
Reefer Madness club has entered the chatThe plural of "anecdote" is not "data". There is a stunning lack of valid studies showing either medical benefts or safety.