Don't misconstrue my post as an insult, it's called hyperbole. It is intended to point out how religious enforcement of legal technicality can be wildly misconstrued.

Even so: If it's fair and just for people in this thread to call me an addict and claim that I'm an illicit drug user- well, that's some colossal butthurt. No pun intended.

Were your own accusations intended as insults or attacks? Talk about childish.

Go ahead and hit report.

Who said you were an addict? And don't take that post as an insult....WTF?

If you do smoke pot or whatever maybe it's legal or for medicinal purposes, who knows. You defending it so vigorously of course people are going to question your motives and assume things. That is all we can go by.

That butthurt seems again to be the "pot, kettle, black" thing going on. Take a fucking chill pill.

See below.

So undefined said you were an addict or addicted, got it. I never did so don't go putting words in my mouth.

By the way do you smoke weed or take THC? Simple question...

Not sure I would believe you but thought I would ask.

Maybe you don't understand. By federal legal definition for we firearm owners, a person who smokes weed is, in fact, "addicted to an unlawful substance."

Remember question 11.e on Form 4473? “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana...or any other controlled substance?”

So yes, for legal purposes, you absolutely are stating that I am an addict when you so "innocently" claim that I smoke. The federal government considers a regular user of Marijuana to be an "addict."

At the very least, if I were actually engaging in illegal activity, you would be happy for me to confess to doing so on a public forum.

So, hero, what about you? How often do you smoke the devil's lettuce? What's the last strain you tried? Did you like it?

So you are comfortable with agents of the state deciding which laws to enforce based on what they believe to be morally right or wrong?

Most of the cops in states where anal/oral sex are both banned between consenting adults- they consider themselves perfectly comfortable with allowing it to continue sans prosecution.

Some of them may even contribute to the illegal, deviant sexual crisis. Gives new meaning to the phrase "dirty cop."

Sound like some in Baltimore eh?  Except that I am perfectly happy with smile and wave. What did the Baltimore thing start with?  Some cops charging someone about a bs knife law, and stretching it as far as they could to make an arrest.  Basically Freddy Grey was a shit bag but law enforcement took it upon themselves to try and railroad him and then ended up getting railroaded themselves.  As far as your last sentence...I know you are trying to rationalize for law enforcement but the bottom line is it is a three link chain and without one of the three there is no chain.

They already do.  Some of them because they want to and some because they are sell outs.
Are you ok with cops in Chicago arresting people for just defending themselves or their home with a hand gun?
 How about people who are forced to land in the NY airport and get arrested for having a gun?  They are just following the law right?

I bet every single person posting here has committed a felony.....we just didn't get caught.

Every single one of you need to keep that in mind when spouting out "go change the law", "shit bird felon", "pot head", etc.

I hope most of you are trolling.

Lol your assuming that's an option...

by your logic, a struggling vet, living Pay Check to Pay Check because his wife drained his accounts and ran off with the guy she was fucking while he was getting his shit kicked in in the sandbox, should get murdered at the atm by some shitbag because "go be poor some place else"

I asked if you smoke in my post you are replying to. If you smoke then yes I guess I'm calling you an addict if you want to be technical and follow federal guidelines by reading into it that way you think. Not what I originally meant but OK. Don't like it too bad buttercup (since the gloves are off now). By the way using some federal guideline is pretty weak. Look up the term addict in the dictionary. Only in your twisted way did I call you an addict not in reality.

So do you smoke or not? I do not smoke it or ingest THC at all. Come on tough guy fess up...not answering tells us a lot about you potheads. The volatility in all of your posts seem to suggest you should up the dosage.

If you don't smoke then you have nothing to worry about by answering do you?

Yeah take that you wheel chair bitch! That's what you get for growing plants on your own property and exercising your 2nd amendment rights!

Dearest Snowflake:

When the only "weapons" in your debate loadout consist of direct and petty accusation, supplemented by leading questions that intimate my alleged use/abuse of the substance in question, it's clear that I'm fighting an intellectually disarmed man. Do you kind of get the analogy? You're coming at me with inference that amounts to an empty-hand combat technique, meanwhile I'm already following through with the recoil from my argument. By the way, you keep asking those questions like a dementia patient. Asking once would be enough of an attempt to smear my character and insult my person. Your repeated inquest, paired with those blatant accusations alleging illegal activity on my part have become ridiculous. You aren't "trolling" me- you are trolling yourself and destroying your own credibility as a rational actor in any discussion on this subject. Maybe in the past, you've enjoyed success in your awkward attempts to interrogate lesser men. (I really doubt it.) In this situation, however, the truth is that I could never find it within myself to possibly give even one fraction of a self-propelled fuck what you or the other guy thinks. In the interests of my reputation on ARFCOM, I answered both of your questions in this post:

So, turnabout is fair play- now answer my questions, or I'll assume you have something to hide:

When was the last time you snorted cocaine? Did your supplier hook you up? Did you enjoy it?

Stop deflecting and answer the question buttercup. You didn't answer my previous question so there is no fair play involved. Insults upon insults slung on me won't change anything.

I don't smoke not or do any sort of hard drugs. See how easy that is...brain damage or not I think you can understand that.

For not caring what I think it sure seems to send you on a little tantrum rant.

Thanks for mocking my physical disability, on top of your previous accusations pertaining to drug use. But those handicaps of mine seem to be less than your own...

Get well soon, ewell44.

I don't care about your disabilities since your mouth (aka posts) doesn't give you any extra leeway with insulting others on here. That is quite obvious.

Stop acting like a victim. Your posts are just as vitriol as others. Please answer my question?

But state law does not supersede federal law. The Supreme Court already made a decision in Lawrence v. Texas that laws criminalizing sexual acts between consenting adults is unconstitutional. So your argument doesn't stand up on that.

And yes, I see the total disconnect of our Supreme Court from not understanding what "Shall not be infringed" means. But unfortunately, it has gotten to the point where laws have slowly chipped away at that. It is going to take reversal of these laws or newer stronger laws concerning gun rights to change this.
Instead you want LE to magically stop enforcing laws that our courts have said ARE legal in regards to the Constitution (or at least haven't said they aren't). These laws have been put in place by the Legislators or Court Rulings. It is not the place of Law Enforcement Officers to make themselves a 4th branch of the government and decide what and what not to enforce.  That is dangerous

And let me say that I do not believe the ex-felon should have his gun rights taken away. Once you have served your debt to society and been deemed safe enough to be in public then you ARE safe enough to be in public with ALL of your Rights restored.

I do not believe that Marijuana should be illegal at all.

I do believe that anyone that was previously convicted of marijuana possession/growing/cultivating should have that record expunged in states that have now legalized it.

I do believe that the Supreme Court should rule any laws criminalizing a God given plant should be struck down as unconstitutional (except Broccoli---that shit should be illegal).

How often does that actually happen in practice? Basically never, right?

An alternate is for law enforcement officers to practice the same sort of thing a juror practices when he decides to nullify a law he considers unjust. Simply put, just don't enforce it. Quietly resolve never to arrest someone for anything you do not believe should be a crime.

Misread this one.

You mean taking responsibility for ones own action? I agree not very often if at all now days.

so ignore the rule of law and work on how you believe.

No, I mean the restoration of a felon's right to own firearms lol.

In Engrish, please.

Probably the same states that make plants illegal.

eta- LOL @ our usual GD "drug warrior" emotional rantings. "Oh teh noes someone smokes teh pots!"

I'm pretty sure neither you nor I have any clue what those percentages are. Point is there is an avenue for him to get his rights back legally and dismissing it outright is ridiculous.

First off, who the hell considers a muzzle-loader to be a firearm
second off, its a show and i would not put a ton of credibility on anything that occurs on it.

If you don’t like it you should petition your legislators to change the laws.  The cop doesn’t have anything to do with it.

Because the facts of a particular incident either meet the written requirements and prerequisites of a section of law or they don't.
You don't get to creatively write facts and make them conform to a statute.
We have to much work already to be inventing reasons to hook people up for stuff that they didn't actually do in reality