patrick.net

CBOEtrader says

Would be REALLY tough to pretend you didnt use the marijuana you purchase w your license.

It's really hard to prove you did use it though. Innocent until proven guilty thing. Could have bought it for a family member or friend that's not near a dispensary. Perfectly legal to give it away or exchange cash at face value for it just like I've paid my buddies for beer they supply at a get together.

Even if they somehow get their hands on your blood, I wouldn't be too worried about it. ATF is the one that enforces this stuff and I'm pretty sure they have bigger fish to fry than the guy buying a gun that "may" have smoked some pot. Look at Chicago for fucks sake, which you know.

And supposedly the license scans at dispensaries are just like buying booze, it's just to verify the age of the purchaser. I don't necessarily believe that it's not being tracked, but that's what IL is saying from what I've read on it.

Medical MJ is different because it's a completely separate license here. So having that is bad if you want a gun. But recreational is legal, so no need for medical license now. It's a problem in Montana with gun owners out there I guess. Docs will hand out the script to get the medical card out there, but you can no longer buy a gun then. My buddy wants to do both, but I guess you're in violation of MT law if you own guns and have the cards. It's a moving target and I'm not giving legal advice. I just think you'd be fine in most legal states. Feds aren't going to come after you in my opinion.

The questionnaire in NY might be different than what they ask in California. When I bought my last pistol, the question relating to MJ was kind of ambiguous. As I recall, it asked if one uses illegal drugs and then it had a little note saying "marijuana is illegal at the federal level." This was a little confusing because it could be interpreted differently by different administrations. During the Obama administration, it became federal policy to ignore marijuana as long as it did not come into conflict with a federal law, ex trafficing across state lines.

Trump seems to have cooled it a little on that issue, he probably realized trying to reverse the current tide is a nonstarter.

So, my interpretation is that someone using MJ legally does not lose their 2nd amendment rights as long as they are not violating federal law, which by policy respects the use within the borders of a legal state.

I see CBOETrader actually has the questionnaire.

They would lose the case because if federal law supersedes state law, which it does, it would be impossible then for states to decriminalize or legalize MJ. Therefore, recognizing states' rights to legalize or decriminalize is an admission that, in this situation, the federal government has allowed legalization or decriminalization. Therefore, one can check the box, NO, if they use or possess in a state that has been allowed by the federal government to legalize or decriminalize, because it is not unlawful use or possession.

WookieMan says

I'm pretty sure they have bigger fish to fry than the guy buying a gun that "may" have smoked some pot.

Yeah I was projecting out in case I had to use it against rioters in my private, walled community. W publicity, the average home defender becomes a St louis couple style politicized big fish.

Was wondering if the MJ thing could be used to fuck the defender in that type of situation.

I assume they wont do a thorough check or care to check until they want to corkscrew you.

Malcolm says

They would lose the case because if federal law supersedes state law, which it does, it would be impossible then for states to decriminalize or legalize MJ.

Interesting.

I hate these grey areas. How tf is an average joe like myself supposed to operate when felony landmines are hidden around every corner?