IV8888 Substack: "On Guns & Weed"

Published on March 21, 2023
Duration: 17:21

This op-ed argues that current prohibitions on marijuana use by firearm owners are not constitutionally sound, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's Bruin v. New York decision. The author contends that historical gun laws, dating back to 1791, did not address substance use but rather focused on race and social control. The piece draws a parallel between the historical targeting of certain groups with gun control measures and the current prohibition on marijuana users, suggesting a lack of logical consistency when compared to the legal status and societal impact of alcohol.

Quick Summary

The author argues that current prohibitions on marijuana use for firearm owners lack constitutional grounding, especially after the Bruin v. New York Supreme Court decision. Historical gun laws from 1791 did not address substance use, and alcohol, which causes more societal harm, is treated more leniently on the Form 4473, highlighting a perceived inconsistency.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: On Guns & Weed Op-Ed
  2. 01:26Revisiting Schedule One and Alcohol's Impact
  3. 02:01Poll: Alcohol vs. Cigarettes vs. Marijuana Societal Harm
  4. 03:00Personal Stance on Alcohol Use
  5. 04:04Bruin v. New York and Second Amendment Scrutiny
  6. 04:47Historical Gun Laws in 1791
  7. 05:15Racist and Elitist Nature of Early Gun Laws
  8. 06:09Cargill v. Garland and Future Legal Battles
  9. 06:14Why Marijuana on Form 4473, Not Alcohol?
  10. 06:34Nixon Administration and the War on Drugs
  11. 07:08Racial Bias in Law Enforcement and Gun Control
  12. 08:02Tides Turning on Marijuana Prohibitions
  13. 08:16VA Clinics Researching Psilocybin
  14. 09:04Author's Approach to Writing and Logic
  15. 10:28Americans Imprisoned Over a Plant
  16. 10:34Personal Freedom and Government Overreach
  17. 11:14Conservative Identity and Nuanced Thinking
  18. 12:01Alcohol Use and the 4473 Form
  19. 13:13Moderation and Odd Treatment of Marijuana
  20. 13:411791 Laws and Substance Use
  21. 14:01Historical Travel with Firearms
  22. 14:46Bruin's Impact on Current Firearm Provisions
  23. 15:16Logical and Constitutional Consistency
  24. 16:33Pushback on Schedule One Substances
  25. 16:47Support the Channel: Substack & Patreon

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the author's main argument regarding marijuana and gun ownership?

The author argues that current prohibitions on marijuana use by firearm owners are constitutionally questionable, especially after the Bruin v. New York Supreme Court decision. They contend that historical gun laws did not address substance use and that alcohol, which causes more societal harm, is treated more leniently on the Form 4473.

How does the author compare alcohol and marijuana in relation to gun ownership laws?

The author highlights that alcohol is demonstrably more damaging to American lives according to a poll, and one can legally purchase a firearm while intoxicated. In contrast, marijuana users face prohibitions, which the author finds illogical and inconsistent with historical interpretations of the Second Amendment.

What historical context does the author provide for gun control laws?

The author points to 1791 laws that focused on race and social control rather than substance use or firearm types. They suggest that early gun control measures were often rooted in racism and elitism, designed to disarm specific populations, a practice they strongly condemn.

What is the significance of the Bruin v. New York Supreme Court case for gun laws?

The Bruin v. New York decision mandates that modern firearms regulations must be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation. This means laws enacted without such historical grounding, like current marijuana prohibitions for gun owners, face increased scrutiny.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Iraqveteran8888

View all →