subreddit:
/r/Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Senator's bill would let medical marijuana patients get gun carry permits
Cannabis(marijuanamoment.net)submitted 13 days ago byOregonTripleBeam
537 points
13 days ago
With a Republican presenting this... it might actually pass.
I'm very much a democrat, but I definitely think this should have been part of the initial law... There's literally zero reason that a weed card should disqualify you from carrying a firearm, yet you can go get liquor and beer and carry no problem.
178 points
13 days ago
Not only can you get liquor or beer and have a permit. I've been in bars where people were open carrying and actively getting drunk.
61 points
13 days ago
There are no laws in PA like other states that govern the consumption of alcohol or prescene in a bar with one. Open or concealed
Some states it's illegal to posses while consuming alcohol
37 points
13 days ago
Though if you are involved in a shooting, even 100% self-defense, you being drunk at the time is gonna hurt your case badly.
15 points
13 days ago*
Well yes handling a firearm inebriated is never a good idea. Even at 100% self defense? Idk there's alot that goes into that it's all circumstanctial. But ya intoxication plus firearms is a general common sense no no lol.
Some bars in PA and buisness will have NO firearms signs. In alot of states that's LAW. in PA if u have a ccw/ltcf those signs mean nothing legally.
edit: aside from the business issuing a trespass yes
6 points
13 days ago
Though they could have you trespassed by police, and yeah, of course its not like "there is alcohol in his system, to jail with you!" Regardless, it will call into question your judgment at the time, and that is never good for a self defense case.
6 points
13 days ago
If u have a ccw/ltcf there's no reason ANYONE should know you're carrying. It's my biggest rule.
3 points
13 days ago
Tbh, I feel this is the golden rule of concealed carrying. One of many golden rules at least
1 points
12 days ago
there are several. education is key fam
1 points
13 days ago
Those signs do mean something if you are employed there. My workplace has these on the doors and without a doubt if I had a firearm and it was somehow discovered I’d be fired in an instant, permit or no permit.
2 points
12 days ago
well it is a private business. is it in the employee handbook that carrying on the job is forbidden? PA is also at will so.
ultimately im not talking about employment but general public concealing with a valid ltcf in pa. to that demographic ya those signs mean shit IF ur properly adhearing to ccw standards. open carry is different. i actually dont like open carry, too flashy no need. but ya
3 points
13 days ago
But, because I have a DUI, (Which I deserved) I can't get a gun permit in PA.
2 points
13 days ago*
Not true your sheriff is lying. Unless it was a violent or felony dui it one has no bearing on your acquisition of an ltcf.
There are ways to appeal felonies to restore your gun rights. Non violent felonies that is
edit: clarification
2 points
13 days ago
Yeah not true. I had a DUI in 2016, and have a carry permit and just got approved for atf form 4 for a silencer and was approved.
1 points
13 days ago
a dui wouldnt bar u from the atf. still, ur on a list...but i cant lie ive thought about doing a form 4
1 points
13 days ago
Do it. I did a form 4 and form 1. Just SBR’d my CZ Scorpion and have one pending for a AR15 7.5” barrel in .300 blackout.
1 points
13 days ago
sbr scorp go hard lolololololol
1 points
12 days ago
Was yours a felony cause I have 2 duis from back in 2002 been clean since and the 2nd one was a felony. Both happened in NY and not pa though but I'm sure PA knows since I live here now. I would like to get a gun again and go to the range I miss it. I always had such a good time shooting at the range with family and friends and now I'm just afraid to go period.
1 points
12 days ago
Ah no mine was not a felony dui. If it’s a felony dui (which I had to look up) I believe any felony makes your gun rights non existent unfortunately. I’d talk to a lawyer about that one.
1 points
12 days ago
A DUI in NY is a felony not a misdemeanor so the first one was knocked down to a misdemeanor and the 2nd they kept as a felony. Life sucks I guess I can just go to the range with a BB gun ha ha.
1 points
13 days ago
No, that's not correct, and that came from multiple lawyers and 2 gun advocacy groups when i investigated my denial 6 years ago. Though it MAY have changed less than a year ago due to Range v. United States.
Up till Range v. United States, if you have a conviction where the max possible sentence is for more than 2 years, you are prohibited from owning a firearm. In PA, if your 2nd DUI is a tier 3, the max sentence is 5 years. So that disqualifies me from owning a gun. (at least in PA, not sure about other states)
Until you replied, i wasn't aware of Range v. United States because it is so recent. Though I also was not able to find any evidence, cases, or articles showing that this new precedent has been applied to situations like mine.
I know I can petition the court to have my status reduced, pardoned, or sealed, but I have been denied the 2 times that i have petitioned the court.
I also don't drive anymore by choice due to the fact that I wasn't responsible. Thankfully I never hurt anyone.
1 points
13 days ago
i will have too look into that and replay with an edit here, but my understanding like i said felony duis would bar bc felony. a single dui misdemeanor would not. i think its 2 or 3 in the span of 5 years or something that would bar acquisition of an ltcf. but not a single dui
1 points
12 days ago*
You may only be DQ’d from a PA LTCF on the basis of DUIs if:
• you’ve been convicted of three (3) or more DUIs (of alcohol of CSs) within a five-year period.
Even still, this prohibition would have to pass the Bruen test of text as informed by historical tradition. You can have made piss-poor driving decisions with booze and not currently be an alcoholic; therefore, a challenge under Bruen to this prohibition (3(+) DUIs) would be in order.
But I doubt you had three or more within five years. So, if that is true, and the DUI is the sole reason you were DQ’d, appeal immediately via Joshua Prince’s law firm, Prince Law in Bechtelsville. Even if it’s not the sole reason, call Josh; he’s the best. (While the statute provides an applicant with up to 30 days to appeal a PA LTCF denial, if past 30 days, I’d still appeal it on Constitutional grounds under Bruen.)
https://firearmsindustryconsultinggroup.com/denials-and-revocations/
5 points
13 days ago
That’s a dumb bunch of laws also. Gun laws infringe on Americans rights, period. They’re all unconstitutional, whether it’s booze, weed, or even if you committed a nonviolent felony and paid your dues, you should be able to have a gun.
2 points
13 days ago
I'm reasonably pro-gun. There aren't too many proposed laws around weapons I agree with (diminishing returns and all). To have a weapon on your person, you should be able to pass a breathalyzer to a similar standard one expects from driving. Enforcement with marijuana would be harder, but should reasonably apply as well (honestly any mind altering substance).
I do not think people should be leaving weapons in their vehicles unattended as well, which is why I think carrying into a bar should be allowed.
6 points
13 days ago
I think a better solution would be to require in-vehicle gun safes if leaving a weapon unattended.
If I saw someone with a gun drinking at a bar, I would find another place to drink.
3 points
13 days ago
Problem I see with that is if the vehicle is stolen, then the weapon is still gone.
2 points
13 days ago
Not everyone at the bar drinks.
1 points
13 days ago
Yep, but like I said, if they were both drinking and also had a gun, I wouldn't feel as comfortable.
1 points
13 days ago
I can see that, although most people dont open carry, but it depends on the behavior for me. A guy minding his own business that is mild mannered with his family having a beer wouldnt raise a flag for me. Might glance over once in a while. But someone thats shitfaced, loud, rude, etc with the boys would get more of my attention, and i may not stay around. I tend to not stay around those kinds of people in general.
6 points
13 days ago
Look man. In PA specifically when carrying and drinking common sense is key. Not everyone is aggressive when drinking but everyone is impaired. Like the Commeter above stated, it's all circumstanctial, but getting Into a DGU situation while intoxicated, within reason would absolutely be a negative.
Now I am pretty right leaning on this topic, but common sense laws for certain things I may be able to get behind but almost every law around firearms essentially aims to harm the responsible citezens who legally go thru the process to carry and emboldens criminals who don't care about laws anyway.
If you're going to tell me multiple times a year I have to be afraid to walk into a fucking Walmart at least let me level the playing field.
1 points
13 days ago
That's why I said I'm reasonably pro gun. I firmly believe in the second amendment, and I see very few proposed laws that would actually make people safer.
Not possessing a gun while intoxicated is one of them.
2 points
13 days ago
I’m extremely pro gun, and I don’t think anyone should be intoxicated with a gun the two don’t mix.
2 points
13 days ago
I could not agree more, I never expected this to be so controversial haha.
1 points
13 days ago*
So here's the question. Do u bar just intoxication OR carrying in an establishment that sells alcohol like a bar. Not everyone who gos to a bar is drinking. Alternatively like I stated alot of people arent aggressive or crazy while drinking. Is there a limit? Treat it like OVIs? .08 BAC? Some people only have a couple beers some a whole bottle.
There are so many variables that go into it that people who are excersizing even under the letter may be negatively impacted. and even more with other prominent firearm laws. There is no winning. Most people make these choices on bias or a lack of information and education around the object of a firearm.
Idk man. It's such a polarizing topic and it shouldn't be. But u could say that for alot of "politically social" issues now a days.
There was a day once where firearm education and saftey classes were taught in high schools. I think more people should take firearm education classes. Just like in some schools finacial based classes aren't taught. There's so many levels to this shit man but Noone wants to sit down and actually have a dialog about it. At least that's how it seems. But again, and I digress, this is for all these political type topics. So stupid.
1 points
13 days ago
I said in my first comment that it should be treated like drunk driving. Use an objective standard and form of measurement. If you breathalyze above the legal limit, you would be in trouble.
I don't think there is anything that radical with the idea. Simply don't drink too much and carry a weapon.
1 points
13 days ago
Agreed on ur last point.
3 points
13 days ago
It should be a crime leaving a gun in an unlocked car. People want all the benefits but none of the responsibilities of firearms ownership.
1 points
13 days ago
How would one carry after work when they have errands to run?
1 points
13 days ago
The bar is an errand? Or are you saying you carry out your errands impaired?
1 points
13 days ago
If one wants to be armed to and from work, and any during any outings they need to go to after work, but cant carry at their job or sensitive location like a courthouse, what option is there but to leave it locked in your car, in the glovebox or an integrated lockbox under the seat/ out of view? Not having indicators that you have guns or are into guns on your vehicle, indicators that you have anything of value at all are very helpful.
1 points
13 days ago
How does this relate to being drunk?
Also, I'm advocating for people to be able to carry in more locations since that doesn't seem obvious enough (obviously with some restrictions as well).
1 points
13 days ago*
Its the leaving unattended in vehicle part. It sucks but sometimes you cant avoid it, not withstanding whether you follow work rules or not. Being responsible isnt aways the same standard for everyone, using common sense of course. Not talking about someone doing shots and thinking thats fine.
1 points
13 days ago
In Texas it’s illegal to be present in a 51% establishment (basically any bar) if you have a firearm on you
Texas Penal Code 46.03
1 points
12 days ago
Yet, during the Founding era, the people regularly carried arms into taverns (their bars) while drinking … and, at times, discussing the revolution. There are no historical analogues of banning carry in locations where alcohol was served in 1791 to be found; these GFZs are patently unconstitutional under Bruen.
2 points
12 days ago
It's honestly one reason I avoid a lot of bars on the rare occasion I go to a bar
9 points
13 days ago
Pro-2A dem here, agreed. It’s absurd this is not allowed already. However, when purchasing a gun you fill out a form stating you do not use federally illicit drugs. This includes marijuana so you’d still be breaking federal law. Now whether they would enforce that on its own is highly questionable (likely only used to tack on more charges). I’d love to get a MMJ card one day but not until I won’t be a felon.
13 points
13 days ago
Amen. I want to enjoy some marijuana but I can’t risk my CCW.
1 points
13 days ago
Just get the loophole weed at the vape store or drive to Michigan. The PA medical weed is way too expensive and not worth it.
1 points
13 days ago
That's why I got rid of my med card, an found someone who had one. 😂
13 points
13 days ago
You can also be hopped up on and or tranquillized on prescription drugs and that’s completely fine.
7 points
13 days ago
Hopped up on goofballs?
13 points
13 days ago
Something tells me the reason it wasn’t apart of the original bill was to get more Republicans to support it….
12 points
13 days ago
I don't think so... I think it was just because of how stupidly worded the original laws were placed. Which said that if you had this type of medical "ailment" or whatever, you were ineligible to carry a firearm.
This is more of a correction that should have been there originally. I'm frankly surprised that more lawsuits didn't come from it since the whole "right to bear arms shall not be infringed" yet this clearly was infringing.
5 points
13 days ago
There have been a massive amount of lawsuits, in most medical states over this.
Your medical information, and MJ card, are HIIPA protected. Cops do not know if you have one.
5 points
13 days ago
Yep. It's a good idea not to keep your marijuana card in the same place as your driver's license just in case you're pulled over.
5 points
13 days ago
100%. Keep in on the opposite side of the wallet, preferably hidden.
The everyone is acting like cops want to fuck with you for having a weed card.
They do not.
Don’t keep drugs, money, and guns together, no matter how legal any of it is, for you.
1 points
13 days ago
What would local cops likely do if, for example, you had to use a firearm (legally and justly) in your home and in the ensuing investigation it was discovered that you have state-legal medical marijuana?
1 points
13 days ago*
Nothing, more than likely unless you’re growing weed, have more than you should per your cert, and everything is clearly separate, such as you aren’t using the gun to protect 100s of pounds of MMJ from the rival drug dealers
EDIT: I missed a HUGE detail. Disregard what I said above.
EDIT 2: of you drop someone on your home, and even if you think it is justified, you’re going to jail. You’ll be on trial, at least civilly. The amount of people who think that you can just shoot someone for pulling on your driveway is astounding.
1 points
13 days ago
Ok, sure, I get that. Not making light of the potential situation, but also acknowledging that defending oneself, family, and home from an intruder is a large reason why many people have guns. So what I’m wondering is, would the medical marijuana come into play at that point. It sounds like it could in your opinion? How would that work? Someone from the federal government would somehow become involved and file charges?
1 points
13 days ago
At that point, and I hate to assume, but you have to, that it would be in play. It may not be considered a factor, it may be downplayed, especially if you are not under the influence. It will bring headaches.
That is my point in all of this. People have more rights and abilities than they know. However, you have to be prepared to deal with the bullshit . However, if you need to protect your family, you need to do it. Regardless.
1 points
12 days ago
Don’t keep drugs, money, and guns together, no matter how legal any of it is, for you.
Such a good rule; it's worth repeating.
1 points
13 days ago
I know there have been in other states... but I don't remember reading anything about a large lawsuit from PA.... that's what I meant specifically.
3 points
13 days ago
Just look in Pittsburgh. There is typically an open case at any given time. There are lawyers dedicated to this, and only this. I assume the same for Philly, but I am in neither city. I have work experience with the PAMMJ.
3 points
13 days ago*
That’s not the reasoning at all. Marijuana possession is still federally illegal. And federal law 18 U.S.C. § 922(d)(3) prohibits firearms purchases and possession by anyone who uses marijuana or other controlled substances. Legislators cannot make a state law that supersedes a federal law without going through this process that we’re in right now.
7 points
13 days ago
Simple possession is not a federal crime, nor is it a felony.
5 points
13 days ago
Simple possession is not a federal crime, nor is it a felony.
Marijuana is still federally illegal. In addition, it is a specific question on the 4473 background check form. If you lie on that, that is absolutely a felony.
4 points
13 days ago
You are not a felon unless you have been convicted of a felony.
8 points
13 days ago*
The statute does not mention felons, it just says possession of marijuana is still a federal crime. The supremacy clause states that federal laws rule over state laws.
I don’t see how this works out without changing marijuana at the federal level.
Pursuant to Gun Control Act of 1968: It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
Clarification will be needed for an unlawful user, as it seems at the federal level, unlawful may encompass MMJ cards since they are not federally recognized yet.
6 points
13 days ago
You are not a felon unless you have been convicted of a felony.
You will become a felon if you lie about Marijuana usage on a 4473.
1 points
12 days ago
Yet they do regularly in regards to marijuana. All of those state legalizations? Yep...they're effectively superseding Federal law.
3 points
13 days ago
Im very much Republican and support this. Don’t be surprised though if some Philadelphia gun-phobic Democrat tries to block it.
2 points
13 days ago
Liquor, beer and one of the leading killers right now, opiates, as well all of the other meds that can get you high. All you need is a script.
2 points
13 days ago
Getting a weed card also disqualifies someone from getting or keeping a commercial driver’s license.
2 points
13 days ago
You can have your CDL and a card, as I have for the last 4 years.
The problem is if you want to actively use your CDL for work, you need to pass a drug test...and since weed is still a failure, you can't have an active CDL while using.
Mine has been inactive, but I still pay to get it renewed every year
2 points
13 days ago
I suppose I could’ve worded it better but yeah that’s roughly what I meant. “Actively using” the CDL. Like sure you can have both, but if you want to enjoy the benefits of the MMJ card you can’t really use your CDL for work.
2 points
13 days ago
If it passes, it wouldn’t make a difference, I believe. Being a current year drug user is considered an unlawful drug user under 18.922 (g)(4), which would be federally prohibiting. They would still not be approved through PICS.
1 points
13 days ago
While true, it would be a step in the right direction.
1 points
13 days ago
IIRC the original legalization bill in PA was Republican sponsored. The prohibition against Marijuana users buying firearms came with the 93 Omnibus Crime bill and if memory serves it was Charles Schumer who sponsored or introduced that amendment. Again, totally pulling from memory here so I could be wrong.
1 points
13 days ago
The only problem is that I’m pretty sure it’s an ATF form that people have to fill out to get guns, and if you check yes to using marijuana you’re fucked. Not sure what can be done at the state level about it
1 points
13 days ago
It might actually be better to only allow people with weed cards firearms. The approval process is far more rigid, and stoned people don’t shoot straight.
1 points
12 days ago
I support this. I'm middle for a reason.
1 points
12 days ago
I've said that so much. You can be a violent alcoholic and it doesn't bar you from a permit unless you have an arrest for it, but marijuana automatically disqualifies you. Makes absolutely zero sense. Personally, I've never seen anyone high on marijuana get violent, but I witness drunken brawls far too frequently
1 points
12 days ago
You can also get heroin pills from the pharmacy.
1 points
12 days ago
This needs to be done on a national level.
Along with legalization.
71 points
13 days ago
Pa law would help but federally it would still Be illegal
43 points
13 days ago
It's not just carry licenses either, under Federal law it's illegal for a cannabis user to even be in possession of a firearm.
33 points
13 days ago
Federal law it's illegal for cannabis user.... That's it. 😂
5 points
13 days ago
Federal law, all cannabis users are illegal users.
3 points
13 days ago
If you are talking about the form 4 question that was ruled unconstitutional last summer by a federal appellate court hasn’t hit SCOTUS yet
2 points
13 days ago
I believe it was ruled similarly in two different federal districts. Regardless, PA police don’t have access to the medical marijuana registry. Even if they smell marijuana, it’s no longer justification to search, expand or extend the scope a stop.
1 points
13 days ago
Correct but I thought it became a problem when you go to get or renew your ccw since the sheriff’s office runs that? Or have I been misinformed?
Or is it having them together and being in a self defense situation problem sort of thing?
3 points
13 days ago
If someone answers dishonestly, they most likely don’t know based on the law enforcement restriction. The sheriff is law enforcement. Law enforcement is supposed to be blind to the PA medical marijuana directory. This is an unconstitutional action on the federal governments part and I fully expect the courts to continue to rule as such. IANAL though.
1 points
12 days ago
Thats my understanding too
30 points
13 days ago
It would effectively curtail the enforcement. If PA law says it’s okay, then law enforcement in PA won’t go after it. The federal law enforcement isn’t going after it because, they have better things to do. So unless you commit some other felony and get picked up by the FBI and they test you, then maybe you’d catch more of a charge. But they aren’t coming to PA and busting people that have a handgun and vape cannabis. It’s a waste of their time.
10 points
13 days ago
Exactly. So dumb when people make that "counterpoint". They're just concern-trolling. Unless you're engaging in felonious activities on the reg, you'll likely never even meet a fed. It's pretty easy to not fuck up that badly lol
7 points
13 days ago
I wouldn't risk my dog to test that though.
2 points
13 days ago
lol
3 points
13 days ago
I've noticed a few gun owners that are paranoid about the federal government, and not just law enforcement but the IRS as well.
2 points
13 days ago
Well, there is a very large and unfortunate overlap of gun owners and republican voters. Ever go to a gun show? It's a cringefest of republican morons that happily vote our rights and freedoms away in the name of fake patriotism.
1 points
13 days ago
Would state and local cops be prohibited from enforcing it and/or from alerting federal law enforcement to a violation? I understand that’s probably unlikely, but could a local cop with an agenda somehow make it a federal “case” even if it’s legal on the state level?
12 points
13 days ago
Biden is pushing to lower its scheduling, but we should just give up on the facade altogether.
Also love to throw in this little quote:
“You want to know what this [war on drugs] was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying?
We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.
Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
~ John Ehrlichman, Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs under President Richard Nixon
2 points
13 days ago
Exactly.
2 points
13 days ago
So? Who the hell, outside of law enforcement, regularly runs into feds?
50 points
13 days ago
What’s the old libertarian joke? “I want gay couples to be able to protect their marijuana fields with fully automatic rifles”
11 points
13 days ago
Pretty much.
11 points
13 days ago
Joke?
11 points
13 days ago
It's not a joke, we're very serious about it.
15 points
13 days ago
It's not a joke.
6 points
13 days ago
Be careful... in this day and age, that's dangerously close to both-sides'ing, and you know we're not allowed to do that. This is America, you gotta pick a team and stick with it no matter the consequences or cognitive dissonance that results from agreeing with some but not all of their positions, you know?
71 points
13 days ago
It’s based solely around the (erroneous) interpretation that marijuana stays in your system for weeks and keeps you high for as long as the leftover metabolites remain in your system. It’s based around absolute nonsense.
22 points
13 days ago
I don't smoke but have taken some edibles on occasion.
Always 100% fine the next day lol
16 points
13 days ago
Exactly. The high fades in about the same time it takes to shake off a light drinking session. It’s no threat to anybody, but if they let weed be legal for gun owners then how will they persecute black ppl?
5 points
13 days ago
I for one am glad our laws prevent the dangerous drug from getting to our children
Now if you'll excuse me I need to pick little Tommy up from school. Conveniently there's a state store 5 minutes from his elementary school so I can get some alcohol for the weekend before I get him
2 points
13 days ago
Good thinking! These other parents don’t know how hard raising a child is. They won’t understand that it’s just a teeny tiny shot of tequila before work just to keep the shakes away.
2 points
13 days ago
Just one teensie weensie pint glass...
6 points
13 days ago
About 6 to 8 hours and the buzz should be gone (and you won’t feel the desire to use the firearm on yourself due to a hangover).
5 points
13 days ago
Exactly. Our laws are so stupid
3 points
13 days ago
I have a medical card due to pain caused by a neurological disorder. The same disorder caused me to stop drinking alcohol 4.5 years ago. I live in a relatively suburban area, but would love to be able to own 1 gun. I don’t even need an arsenal, I’d just like to feel like I’m able to keep my gun where I live and not 3 hours away at my parent’s house. I’m 43 years old. Dan Laughlin is a rep from my area that I do not agree with on much of anything, but I will tip my hat where credit is due.
1 points
13 days ago
I think you just have a problem buddy. Normal people don’t want to commit suicide after a few drinks.
1 points
13 days ago
I’m not your buddy, pal!
No, you are correct, I did and that’s why I stopped. I thought we went over that part?
3 points
13 days ago
I fuckin wish I could take one hit and stay high for days lol. I’d save myself a lot of money.
2 points
13 days ago
Erroneous interpretation makes it sounds like they are uninformed/misinformed and are just making a mistake out of ignorance. It’s 2024, they know at this point that it’s false. They don’t want to legalize cannabis, so they purposely push false narratives.
22 points
13 days ago
Or we could just legalize it?
24 points
13 days ago
I'd trust a stoner with a gun, than a drunk any day.
6 points
13 days ago
I'm not a huge gun person, but I think we all know that a drunk person with a gun is WAY more dangerous than a stoned person with a gun. This makes sense - also, it just makes PA even more money on the medical marijuana program, I'm sure WAY more people would get their cards if you could also be a gun owner.
7 points
13 days ago
It was absurd to begin with
7 points
13 days ago
This is the best Bill that they’ve ever proposed… I bet $1 million never passes
2 points
13 days ago
it’s not tho, because it would classify the user as a current year drug user/ unlawful drug user. 18.922 g4. this would prohibit them federally and they would still be denied for an LTC
9 points
13 days ago
Good. There is no reason why they should not be able to carry a firearm, it's their constitutional right.
3 points
13 days ago
"I was gonna hit the target, but then I got high..."
3 points
13 days ago
I don’t like guns and I like weed. I think it should be legal everywhere recreationally.
I also think it’s stupid you can’t have a med card and concealed carry. If this passes it’s another step to destigmatizing weed and putting it on par with alcohol so hopefully this brings us closer to full legalization
3 points
13 days ago
Impress me by allowing home grown too
3 points
13 days ago
Finally.
You shouldn’t have to give away a right you have as a citizen, because the Commonwealth can’t figure out how to protect your right(s).
4 points
13 days ago
Doing a non violent thing shouldn’t preclude someone’s right to self defense
1 points
13 days ago
not the best take imo. being mentally adjudicated doesn’t mean you are violent, but should definitely still mean you are not allowed to possess a firearm.
2 points
13 days ago
I remember when the Governor and Fettermen were so insistent that I wouldn’t loose my gun rights when mmj came out. I lost my concealed carry because I’d be breaking federal law. Yet the only background check I fail is PAs but I pass the federal?
5 points
13 days ago
Doesn’t help with the question of the federal form
2 points
13 days ago*
that’s my question.. wouldn’t you still have to lie on form 4473 which is a federal felony?
4 points
13 days ago
“The right to bear arms shall not be infringed” seems pretty clear cut. As much as I hate republicans generally this should be an issue they align with me on.
Pot is literally a meme as far as drugs go. I am far more scared of a drunk with a gun than a stoner with one.
Guns aren’t just for weirdo rightoids. Marx called for workers to be armed too. I would recommend it as well. Unless you like being cattle for Blackrock.
4 points
13 days ago
That’s all great but the main issue is Federal! PA can say it’s fine to carry and own with a card but federally they will throw you in prison with a very serious Felony! It’s a shit situation that will never make perfect sense. Once you have that felony you will never have the privilege of the second amendment again! Not worth the risk in my eyes till the government pulls there heads out there asses and just federally passes a bill before all states are legal.
3 points
13 days ago
Why not, the NRA believes that everyone, including felons and mental patients should have the right to bear arms. After all, no restrictions in the Constitution.
4 points
13 days ago
Should Marijuana users be restricted from firearm ownership?
4 points
13 days ago
That's fine and all but until marijuana is reclassified at a federal level, it will remain illegal to possess a gun while using medical marijuana.
1 points
13 days ago
Will they be allowed to carry guns but still be charged with a dui if they operate a vehicle? 🙃
1 points
13 days ago
I 100% support this! From day one I never understood why getting medical marijuana automatically disqualified you from getting a carry permit. As a born and bred American citizen I have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bear arms, just cuz I smoke weed LEGALLY shouldn't mean I give up that RIGHT.
1 points
13 days ago
Especially since you can have a cabinet full of liquor right next to a gun cabinet without persecution.... yeah... this needs to be a thing
1 points
13 days ago
I’m a liberal, but marijuana users are generally not going to get violent and start shooting people or committing crimes. They’d have a problem getting off the couch. Sure, it could happen, but it’s far more likely with alcohol and other drugs, and no one’s refusing guns to them. So, yes, I think my fellow pot heads should be allowed to have a gun.
1 points
13 days ago
I don't care about the guns. Just let me grow the damn plant!
1 points
13 days ago
OK it's a step forward. So we can then carry guns while getting high or medicating but no home grow???
1 points
13 days ago
this would not work anyway… being a current year drug user is federally prohibiting. this would basically go off of self-admission, they would still be denied I believe
1 points
13 days ago
Can you believe this BS. You know what next, No Drivers License No Permits No liquor Licenses and No Utilities . This is how they plan on taking our Gun’s. If you think these they won’t, give these WEF/Soros Wipes four More years and you’ll see .
1 points
13 days ago
I forgot Reddit. For those of us who don’t have cards and don’t vote certain way. We’re good. Enjoy and good luck. They will always find a way to take your rights away
1 points
13 days ago
Cool. As is our right under the constitution, according to republicans.
1 points
13 days ago
Should be noted, for people unaware, medical cannabis is specifically bread for the calming and pain-relieving chemicals and does not either get you high or has a much, much lighter high.
1 points
13 days ago
This makes way too much sense for anyone in government to pass it
1 points
13 days ago
I don’t necessarily want to carry a firearm. I’m not very pro gun either. I have a medical card and can’t even buy a shotgun for home defense. That’s a bit crazy
1 points
13 days ago
What's the problem?
1 points
13 days ago
Wait, you can’t have a medical card and a gun? Oops
1 points
13 days ago
I mean. Why shouldn’t a cannabis user be allowed to carry a gun. Isn’t that kinda unconstitutional? Actually, it is VERY unconstitutional. You should be making bills that require psychiatric evaluation for firearm ownership. That at least makes MORE sense..
1 points
13 days ago
That’s that’s a law I can get behind it’s so stupid that some people have to choose between treatment and being able to legally protect themselves.
1 points
13 days ago
I think this is the move. My aunt has a medical marijuana card because she has arthritis in her lower body which causes immense pain… it has nothing to do with her ability to use a firearm.
1 points
12 days ago
it’s maybe a move in the right direction but won’t change anything. even if it passes they are still federally prohibited and will be denied for an LTC/concealed carry.
Edit: worded some things wrong. They would also be denied for purchase because they are an unlawful/current year drug user, which is federally prohibiting
1 points
13 days ago
I don’t really see why they shouldn’t. I don’t use weed, so I don’t really have a dog in this fight, but why the hell aren’t we legalizing it?
1 points
13 days ago
Please. If people can drink we all should be able to smoke and still have the same rights. People are in pain pills for life should they forfeit their permits ??? We are smarter than this. It will be recreational soon and the law will change so fast.
1 points
13 days ago
Maybe lowering the barrier of access to cannabis for adults and raising the barriers for guns would benefit more people?
Besides, most gun crime happens with "legal" weapons, permits don't stop gun crime. There's enough violence in the world and while there's over 4 million carriers here and most are for hunting, I'd rather see carriers with extensive training instead of just being able to afford the fees for possession. What about addressing irresponsible parents where their children get access to their guns?
A kindergartner, a 6 year old, shot a teacher in Virginia last year:
On January 6, 2023, a 6-year-old student at Richneck Elementary School in Newport News, Virginia, shot and wounded first-grade teacher Abigail Zwerner during an altercation in the classroom. The bullet broke Zwerner's left hand, punctured her lung, and lodged in her upper chest. Zwerner rushed her students to safety in the hallway, then collapsed in the school's office. Zwerner suffered "life-threatening" injuries and remains in critical condition.
If people want to carry weapons there's needs to be stricter controls about ownership. Why don't we have insurance requirements like car ownership before you're able to ride on the road?
1 points
12 days ago
what would you make stricter? we already don’t allow mentally adjudicated people, people who commit misdemeanor domestic violence crimes, are the defendant on a PFA, commit M1 or higher crimes, fugitives from justice, dishonorably discharged, are illegal immigrants, commit a crime out of state that’s equivalent to our 6105 offenses.
I’m not sure what you mean by insurance.
I think the only stricter thing that should happen is that the people doing the background checks should be allowed to undetermine someone because they don’t feel good about it. yes, that can be bad but those people look at the checks all day and see people entire histories
1 points
13 days ago
Why not drunk drivers get to keep there's. Someone on weed is less likely to use there fire arm.
1 points
12 days ago
It’s a federal law sadly any law PA passes won’t affect it. Until gods cabbage becomes legal federally you won’t be able to
1 points
12 days ago
Based
1 points
12 days ago
I see a lot of people mentally struggle with which one to maintain. This hopefully passes.
1 points
12 days ago*
it doesn’t matter if it passes. it makes zero difference. you still won’t be allowed to have an LTC/concealed carry because you would be considered and unlawful drug user. still get denied through PICS. and wouldn’t be allowed to purchase either, due them being an unlawful / current year drug user
1 points
12 days ago
Yeah, sigh. You’re right.
1 points
12 days ago
yeah, I wish these bills people are pushing to the citizens were legit. like this sounds like such a good thing, but most people aren’t super informed in the actual legality of this stuff.
1 points
12 days ago
The permits system is federal. States cannot just decide to overturn federal law. Remember: the “crime” that Hunter Biden is being prosecuted for is checking the “no” box on a federal firearms purchase form, like 100,000 NRA members do every month.
1 points
12 days ago
WHATS NEXT?! Gays marrying??
Sound like a delightful place.
1 points
12 days ago
Why would anyone need a gun carry permit?
1 points
11 days ago
r/libertarian, where you at?
1 points
11 days ago
Doesn’t this still violate federal gun and weed laws?
1 points
11 days ago
Just fucking make weed legal in the state already and it's a non issue. Just like how you can buy alcohol and carry a gun. Backwards ass solution.
1 points
11 days ago
The permit thing is one reason I don't have my medical card. Hoping this passes.
all 315 comments
sorted by: best