Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Marijuana Disqualification Question To Be Removed From ATF 4473
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JR777" data-source="post: 3552939" data-attributes="member: 45725"><p>You're still not getting it.</p><p></p><p>Lying on the form is illegal. On this we can agree.</p><p></p><p>What you're not grasping is that the legal status of marijuana is unknown when it comes to otherwise legal state users. Therefore it is unknown if someone is lying or not if they answer no.</p><p></p><p>There is something called desuetude. If a law is conspicuously violated and yet goes conspicuously unprosecuted, as a matter of public policy, it is considered to be obsolete. It was just upheld by the supreme court in 2003, and it's been upheld in state supreme courts before that.</p><p></p><p>There is no law in history that is more conspicuously violated or has gone more unprosecuted as a matter of official policy than the federal marijuana law. By publicly choosing not to enforce the law as it applies to state legal marijuana, the de facto state of affairs is that it no longer applies. Like I said, 20 years ago they would have had a strong case, but the ship has pretty much sailed. If it hadn't, commercial banks and multimillion dollar hedge funds wouldn't be diving head first into it. Like I said, the genie is out of the bottle, and it can no longer be put back in.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JR777, post: 3552939, member: 45725"] You're still not getting it. Lying on the form is illegal. On this we can agree. What you're not grasping is that the legal status of marijuana is unknown when it comes to otherwise legal state users. Therefore it is unknown if someone is lying or not if they answer no. There is something called desuetude. If a law is conspicuously violated and yet goes conspicuously unprosecuted, as a matter of public policy, it is considered to be obsolete. It was just upheld by the supreme court in 2003, and it's been upheld in state supreme courts before that. There is no law in history that is more conspicuously violated or has gone more unprosecuted as a matter of official policy than the federal marijuana law. By publicly choosing not to enforce the law as it applies to state legal marijuana, the de facto state of affairs is that it no longer applies. Like I said, 20 years ago they would have had a strong case, but the ship has pretty much sailed. If it hadn't, commercial banks and multimillion dollar hedge funds wouldn't be diving head first into it. Like I said, the genie is out of the bottle, and it can no longer be put back in. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Marijuana Disqualification Question To Be Removed From ATF 4473
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom