General Discussion

Romulox

(25,960 posts)

61. WHAT safety concerns? Are you referring to a peer review study? Or do you just have "concerns"?

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 12:25 PM

Jan 2013

but that doesn't address the issue of known addicts and drunks having access to killing machines.

Marijuana isn't addictive, and this article isn't about alcohol. Your comprehension isn't very good, even when not impaired.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If fixing the NICS database means greater reporting of marijuana convictions are you good with it? [View all] HereSince1628 Jan 2013 OP

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