Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

pipoman

(16,038 posts)
42. Not "in common use for lawful purposes"
Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:43 AM
Jan 2013

is the basis for NFA registration..applied in Miller, referenced several times since.

Sure - why not? nt jmg257 Jan 2013 #1
I'm not suggesting they shouldn't I'm just asking. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #3
The Feds are irrelevant at this point, they just don't know it yet. nt bemildred Jan 2013 #2
Check me please, you seem to be saying the instant check for gun purchases is irrelevant? HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #4
I'm talking about dope, this is about dope records preventing gun purchases, yes? bemildred Jan 2013 #6
So, imagination is why everyone complains the prisons hold too many mj offenders? HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #10
No, the scripts, the doctors write, those are imaginary. bemildred Jan 2013 #12
Yes, I've seen the documentaries on the MM industry. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #16
I have "acquaintances". bemildred Jan 2013 #17
That is sure not how it works in Oregon. The State, each year, gets two separate forms from Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #37
And then again, in Colorado it's completely legal. bemildred Jan 2013 #47
But many of the things you say are not accurate outside of CA. It is that simple. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #50
Thanks for clearing that up. nt bemildred Jan 2013 #54
My MMJ recommendation (it is not legally a "prescription") kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #56
Exactly. (And that is without even considering that people will lie freely in that context.) nt bemildred Jan 2013 #57
Your edit takes it back to people who want guns will get them... HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #14
Yes. Especially if they are stupid enough to tie MM to it. bemildred Jan 2013 #15
Nonetheless it is the law to report records of users/addicts, and Universal checks mean little if HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #18
True enough, and I'm saying the database will be full of holes. bemildred Jan 2013 #19
I'd bet much of the exec order stuff announced today is directed at makin instant checks better. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #24
I think it's political drama. bemildred Jan 2013 #34
At some level it's more than political drama...it's also about rights to equal protection/treatment HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #39
I think it's about changing the law. bemildred Jan 2013 #45
The equal protection issue is much more up front that you think. Your views of the law are CA Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #49
You don't appear to have any idea what I think. nt bemildred Jan 2013 #55
Post removed Post removed Jan 2013 #8
You think they needed more guns? bemildred Jan 2013 #9
Terrible yes, but obviously a non sequiter. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #11
It's certainly not a reason NOT to modernize and update the database alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #5
As it exists, the regs require user/addicts of unlawful subtances be prohibited HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #7
I have no problem with that alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #13
The simple fix... Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #20
This obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #21
Legalize drugs in general and the gun violence problem largely disappears Recursion Jan 2013 #23
An exceptionally good point Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #26
I'm not saying there wouldn't be other problems, of course Recursion Jan 2013 #28
Intoxication by alcohol or other substance is a major factor in all violence. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #32
Removing intoxicants is something I'm going to go out on a limb and declare impossible Recursion Jan 2013 #33
Much resistance about that remains across the country HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #27
Actually a majority of Americans now support legalization of marijuana...not that Congress cares Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #46
I guess I'm an outlier. I'm a 55 yo woman and I support legalization of MJ. kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #58
10 points to the first good answer, the only good answer... Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #44
Simple to say, not so simple to try to implement HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #52
doesn't address safety concerns ecstatic Jan 2013 #53
Felony Convictions Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #59
WHAT safety concerns? Are you referring to a peer review study? Or do you just have "concerns"? Romulox Jan 2013 #61
I know some people who are having a rough time quitting ecstatic Jan 2013 #62
This is what is called an "anecdote". Generally it's not very useful in public policy debates. Romulox Jan 2013 #63
Yes. Robb Jan 2013 #22
Only if DUI convictions will also be reported obamanut2012 Jan 2013 #25
That would probably depend on state prohibitions... I think that's possible. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #29
It is the guns that are available that is the problem. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #30
Countries with no serious constitutional hurtles.. pipoman Jan 2013 #35
We regulated machine guns in 1934. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #38
Yeah, Heller and McDonald both said the scope of regulation is pretty broad Recursion Jan 2013 #41
Not "in common use for lawful purposes" pipoman Jan 2013 #42
There are so many bigger problems with NICS pipoman Jan 2013 #31
I'll bet the issue of states not reporting is addressed by Obama today. HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #36
Maybe the system would actually be effective pipoman Jan 2013 #43
My suggestion would be... Volaris Jan 2013 #40
Real enforcement of the Brady Act and disciplined attention to the reporting requirements of NICS HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #48
Shooting while high... ecstatic Jan 2013 #51
Can you imagine the Gun Warriors teaming up with the Drug Warriors? It's like a culture war Romulox Jan 2013 #60
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If fixing the NICS databa...»Reply #42