this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
42 points (93.8% liked)

guns

1194 readers
78 users here now

Keep it civil.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] clif@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I knew a career, retired, cop and he once told me "I never once rolled up to a domestic dispute where there was a bong smoking on the table and everyone was stoned. Alcohol, however, pretty much every damn time."

[–] Big_Boss_77@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 2 months ago

Cop I knew dozens of years ago always said the same thing ...he would "much rather roll up on a group of stoners than even one drunk asshole"

[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Good, it's absurd to take away someone's gun rights just because they smoke marijuana.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And fundamentally Anti-Constitutional.

Nowhere is there anything supporting this idea - rights aren't conditional. I even have an issue with rights that are curtailed by a felony conviction. What logic supports this? None.

[–] SoJB@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 months ago

The logic where it says “well-regulated”?

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

It's a question on the buyer questionnaire. If you admit to smoking weed, they won't even sell you the gun.

[–] YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I may actually end up owning a gun someday if it makes it through the Supreme Court. Although I think I could still legally 3d print one.

[–] Letstakealook@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

FYI: possession is illegal if you're a marijuana user, regardless of how you acquire the firearm.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Unless you're in the 5th circuit which has some good precedent in your favor.

[–] Letstakealook@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

For sure, I just wanted to provide clarification because it would appear they thought current law only prevented purchase.