Supreme Court sides with a Texas man who says it’s not a crime for marijuana users to have guns
5 days ago by LuminousLuddite to c/news
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday against a broad federal ban on gun ownership by marijuana users, the latest in a line of firearm cases from a court that has expanded gun rights.
The justices decided unanimously in favor of Ali Danial Hemani, a Texas man who argued that a law barring guns from anyone who uses illegal drugs violates the Second Amendment.
You're going to argue against an armed citizenry with a stright face. With everything that is going on? No thanks.
I'd love to see better mental health for kids, because by the time they even considered using a gun we've already failed them
what does that even mean, "with everything that is going on"?
because it doesn't seem to be doing much good
The rise of fascism. And we're still in the early phases. They'll go after private gun ownership when people start starving.
That infringes MY right not to have some dumb fucking redneck packing heat around me.
You have no such right and you never did.
A hammer can be a tool of death, really anything can be. And please point us to the law that states you have the right to not be around armed citizens.
Many towns, particularly towns in the Old West, operated like this.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/...
Same thing with many cities in early modern Europe. In many places it's been common upon entering a town or settlement that you have to check your weapons in at some location, like a sheriff's office. Check your weapons in when you go into town, get them back when you leave.
The first law passed in Dodge City, Kansas was one prohibiting the carrying of guns inside city limits. So, I suppose that's the law I would point to!
Lol I'm not sure how you extracted that I was saying the two are the same. All I was saying that anything can be used as an instrument of death if someone is so motivated, but by all means, continue your crusade.
You need to drink less coffee.
I love freedom, I think firing guns is fun, but I don't own them and am blown away by the downvotes you got. Has lemmy just become gun toting libertarians like reddit?
I’m pretty sure it’s mostly his tone of voice and presumptuous attitude. But all that aside, given how many people in this country have said they want to see me and mine dead lately, I will be hanging on to my firearms, thank you very much, and if that makes me a ‘gun-toting readneck’ then so be it.
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary"
-Notable libertarian Karl Marx
But they do have the right to move to another country without dumb fucking gun laws.
Do they? As far as I know that is a lot easier said than done. You'd need a passport and a visa to allow entry to the other country, and the whole residence thing is another big hurdle. Not to mention the monetary requirement that expatriating involves.
Except most places they're not armed
You do realized that there are only about 20 countries worldwide that firearms are outright banned, right? The rest, unlike the US and select African/ME countries, implement and actually enforce strict ownership and carrying laws. So while you can reasonably expect that people aren't publicly carrying in, say, Europe, they very well can have a healthily stocked safe at home.
I'm with you mate. I wish every single person with a gun was fucking dead. There I said it.
Dead how, though? You gonna just stab everyone one at a time? Should we line up for it? Do we have to leave our guns at home before we get in the stabbing line?
ಠ_ಠ
I’m… mildly shocked that they ruled this way.
The gun lobby is ridiculously powerful. Of course they weren't gonna decide the case any other way.
Zardoz speaks to you, his chosen ones
No no , penis good, vagina evil
They're opposed to denying anyone guns at the moment
They recently reversed their pistol brace ruling which has been very controversial in the 2A community.
It's not really surprising. Rights for gun ownership are in the Constitution, there's nothing there about drugs. That's a very straightforward argument, regardless of your stance on either.
Well obviously it has to be more complex than that. There's also nothing in there about banning the private ownership of any kind of weapon. Going by your interpretation, any ban on private citizens owning nuclear weapons is unconstitutional. After all, there's nothing in the Constitution about granting an exception to the right to bear arms for weapons past a certain power level.
Pretty sure the right to bear arms implies you need to be able to lift and weild it on your own.
Nukes aren't arms, they're armament.
They can't restrict gun access for any reason. They'll take care of marijuana legalization another time.
If, not saying we should, but if we were going to restrict gun rights for substance use it should be for alcohol. A drunk person with a gun is orders of magnitude more dangerous then a high person.
Personally I'd probably be safer with a gun if I were stoned because I'd just stay the fuck away from it because it would make me anxious.
It's already illegal pretty much anywhere in the US to carry/use a firearm while drunk.
Sure, but that's irrelevant to the discussion here. The question isn't whether it's legal to use a gun while under the influence of either substance. The question is whether being a user of either substance should disqualify you from owning a firearm.
Not in my state 🤣
It's cocaine and gunfire time in America!
By god, that's Hunter Bidens theme music I hear!
Lowkey with any other last name he's a conservatives icon.
Crack is the good and proper Murican form of cocaine
It's economical!
So does this mean they can completely expunge their attack on Hunter Biden because gun + crack?
Rare W these days.
decided unanimously
A rare sight these days
Trump, California, and a gun violence advocacy group all supported this and even the SC lined up. This is a winning platform no one has the balls to run on. We can make the laws around both actually make sense and the people seem very receptive to it. If dems want to actually bring right learners into their big tent being less stupid about gun legislation is the eternal number one issue for a lot of people who may share few if any other opinions with the conservatives.
Indeed
A rare sight these days
I think almost 50% of decisions were unanimous in their last term.
Any idiot can have a gun. Any drunk can have a gun. Any thug can have a gun. Why would marijuana users be discriminated against?
Because a ton of geriatrics and lawmakers believe in reefer madness. I’m sure there’s a second group but I’m blanking.
Bible thumpers?
Racists. It's vestigial Jim Crow.
Because these old white racists making the laws are racists and still associate pot and other drugs with people who have darker skin. One of the only other times Republicans were for gun control was when the Black Panthers armed themselves.
That’s why. They’re racists.
I mean I feel it is always a guarantee that you drop the "Don't tread on my 2nd Amendment" you be painted as a saint. ESPECIALLY in Texas.
This was the supreme court overruling Texas.
They hate rown people smoking more than they live their guns, remember that.
This was the supreme court overruling Texas.
No, this was SCOTUS overruling the Federal Government. As far as I can tell his charges were Federal and he was never prosecuted by Texas itself.
They hate rown people smoking more than they live their guns, remember that.
You should remember to check the details and use spell check.
Could we ask them if gun ownership precludes you from having an abortion?
https://themarijuanaherald.com/...
He's still a fucking asshole though despite his (in my opinion) correct stance on cannabis legality.
Aren't you the one having a tantrum a few comments up!?
Send lawyers guns and money.
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
Good! It's always nice to see people get more freedom, not less
save