US court upholds ban on gun sales to marijuana card holders.

[Text Drivers are Killers]

The court did the right thing but for the wrong reason. The court should not have even heard the case since the constitution says courts are not allowed to repeal laws anyway.

http://www.blacklistednews.com/US_c...marijuana_card_holders/53850/0/38/38/Y/M.html

aug 31 2016 A federal government ban on the sale of guns to medical marijuana card holders does not violate the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals applies to the nine Western states that fall under the court’s jurisdiction, including California, Washington and Oregon.

It came in a lawsuit filed by S. Rowan Wilson, a Nevada woman who said she tried to buy a firearm for self-defense in 2011 after obtaining a medical marijuana card. The gun store refused, citing the federal rule banning the sale of firearms to illegal drug users.

Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has told gun sellers they can assume a person with a medical marijuana card uses the drug.

The 9th Circuit in its 3-0 decision said Congress reasonably concluded that marijuana and other drug use “raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated

 

[Legion Troll]

Well, they couldn't have gotten any ammo anyway, according to you. THINK.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

The court did the right thing but for the wrong reason. The court should not have even heard the case since the constitution says courts are not allowed to repeal laws anyway.

maybe you can better explain your opinion on why rights should be dependent upon your own personal preferences?

 

[evince]

but alcohol is fine



this court needs a medical lesson or two

 

[Timshel]

The court did the right thing but for the wrong reason. The court should not have even heard the case since the constitution says courts are not allowed to repeal laws anyway.

What is the right reason to do this?

Where does the constitution say that?

 

[evince]

anyone on any type of medication should also be banned then

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

What is the right reason to do this?

Where does the constitution say that?

the very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states"

Courts cannot write, alter, or repeal laws - though they do it all the time.

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

anyone on any type of medication should also be banned then

HAHAHA. Pot is no more medicine than booze is. This "medical marijuana" story is a giant scam.

 

[evince]

fuck you very much you idiot lying racist

 

[evince]

the very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states"

Courts cannot write, alter, or repeal laws - though they do it all the time.

they have to comply with the constitution asshole

 

[Timshel]

the very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states"

Sure, but you said...

the constitution says courts are not allowed to repeal laws anyway.

Where does it say that?

Again, what was the right reason to do this?

Did the court overstep it's bounds in McDonald v Chicago?

 

[Timshel]

BTW, the court does not actually repeal any laws. That's why Alabama still has many Jim Crow laws.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

anyone on any type of medication should also be banned then

Are the medications illegal, under federal law?