this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
335 points (98.6% liked)

News

37060 readers
2480 users here now

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.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 112 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

They're just trying to find other ways to take guns from leftists and trans people.

Also, since pot is federally illegal, and legal states don't normally give the feds buyer info, how the hell would they even know? A form asking if you smoke pot? What stops someone from just saying they don't?

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 73 points 5 months ago (8 children)

A form asking if you smoke pot?

Yes, that's exactly what already happens. The form in question is ATF 4473 for purchasing a firearm, and it is a federal crime to lie on that form. As far as the ATF is concerned, it does not matter if weed has been legalized in your state or not, or if it's for medicinal purposes or recreational.

As of now, you cannot own a firearm if you are "an unlawful user of, or addicted to" pot or any other banned substance. This has rarely been enforced, and it's hard to bring enough evidence to actually prove it. Were they a user when they bought it? A user an hour later? A month later? How do you even prove that in court?

The few times it's been prosecuted, it's usually one thing in a pile of more serious charges.

If the Supremes rule against it, then it's just the status quo. Nobody can really prove it. There is some reason to think they'll strike this down.

[–] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think the answer lies in the Hunter Biden charges. They can ask the question when purchasing a firearm and then charge with a crime later if they can show that the person lied.

Honestly wouldn't be shocked if they started going after recreational marijuana either. Some big liberal states have legal marijuana.

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

. . . if they can show that the person lied.

That's the hard part, and the reason why it doesn't get enforced.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

Yeah, I suppose my point is that it's very difficult to prove in court (especially the "regularly" part), and something would likely have to happen alongside the charge for it to be investigated in the first place. In other words, it seems like mostly theater, although it would be another tool to further charge any leftists that smoke pot in the future.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

it is a federal crime to lie on that form

But are you really lying when you think or feel you're answering truthfully?

I.e., what is regular? Once a month? Once a week? These seem more "occasional" than "regular". And even at 3+ times per week, in "regular" territory, what if you stop?

Are you still a regular smoker if you've been clean for a month? Two months? Three or four? Six or a year?

Of course, this is all under the assumption they don't just get ICE'd or Venezuela-boated.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Yep, it was this stupid bullshit that they got Hunter Biden on for his illegal owning of a firearm.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] flandish@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

the question on the form is not temporally bound; it asks if you are currently using. i read it as “are you smoking while filling the form out?”

the answer is always “no.”

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is already the law, they are actually looking to overturn it. Despite having used it to prosecute Hunter Biden.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] surfrock66@lemmy.world 55 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Wonderful, set precedent that the 2nd amendment is totally subject to the whim of the president. Then let's flip all of government in 2028 and work on fixing this gun problem once and for all.

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago (2 children)

i’m all for better gun laws, and I speak as someone who owns multiple and yet still does not trust the 2nd amendment anyway. I think we should be reminding folks that “amendments” don’t mean shit, and we need legit common sense laws.

and a separation of concerns when it comes to what a gov can and cannot do. eg: laws won’t stop ppl from owning guns, but mental health/healthcare WILL stop people from causing harm.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] REDACTED 55 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Feels like alcohol should be higher in priority over weed when it comes to anger issues

[–] Grumpyleb@lemmus.org 16 points 5 months ago

recovering alcoholic here who has had guns, this comment is spot on. I smoke pot as well, never had an issue when high, but have been stupid with guns while drunk.

[–] LittleBorat3@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Came here for this: which of the substances makes you more likely to play Russian roulette?

The amount of accidents with guns and blood alcohol concentration must be fairly high.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 33 points 5 months ago (3 children)

NO ONE IN THIS COMMENT SECTION READ PAST THE HEADLINE.

Everyone here is assuming they're trying to outlaw this. It is already outlawed. They're looking to overturn it.

[–] spacesatan@leminal.space 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm hoping it's mostly europeans, I feel like most americans with any exposure to gun culture should already know about this being illegal.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

One of the biggest potheads I know is a right wing trumpet with TONS of guns. The irony would be pretty sweet I gotta say.

[–] Macallan@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What if I irregularly smoke pot?

[–] BadmanDan@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Only can own ARs then

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 14 points 5 months ago (5 children)

This sounds like an attempt to prevent black people from owning guns, in the same way a marijuana conviction has kept them from owning dispensaries.

I know white people smoke pot, but they don’t usually try to make laws to keep white people down in the same way.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Triumph@fedia.io 14 points 5 months ago

ATF form 4473 question 11(e) asks:

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? [my bold]

Are you. Right at the moment you are checking the box, are you an unlawful user ...?

Caffeine and nicotine are stimulants.

Are you ... addicted to ... any ... stimulant ... ?

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 12 points 5 months ago

TBF, I think the people smoking pot should be the ONLY ones allowed to have guns, much more laid back.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Now do alcohol and you have a gun free country :D

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Just so we're all on the same page, the current status quo is that you cannot buy a firearm if you use pot. This ruling would potentially change that. No, it does not matter if your state has legalized it, or if it's strictly for medicinal use. The ATF doesn't care.

It's rarely enforced, but it's there.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No one else here bothered to get on this page.

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 5 months ago

I tried.

This thread is a pretty good example of why I say that even if you're completely against any guns existing in society at all, you should still know how they work and what current laws actually do. Otherwise, you get the jumping to conclusions and bad analysis that we see here.

[–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Watch as the GOP takes away gun rights from a sizable portion of their own pot smoking, 2A glazing base... and none will waiver their support.

Like clockwork, they get mad for all of 3 seconds, then they remember the GOP is leading the genocide against brown people and LGBTQ+ people, then they forget anything happened at all.

[–] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 months ago

It's already illegal. This is a challenge to restore those rights.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 8 points 5 months ago

lol. so many rural gun owners smoke pot. the stereotype is a urban youth but it is so common in rural areas.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

I hope they decide they can. That said the entire corpus of the Roberts court still needs thrown out

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Pot snokers may be on the fence about you coming for their guns, but gun owners are gonna get real mad about you coming for their weed

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

snokers

IS THERE SOME WAY OF IMBIBING WEED THAT I AM NOT AWARE OF AND WHAT IS IT

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)

I'm gonna take a shot in the dark here and guess that they'll completely forget about the historical precedent test that they just randomly pulled out of their ass, but only when it comes to drugs, queer people, and leftists.

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They can have it once it's empty.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (7 children)

In 2019 I asked my doctor if I should have my vaccinations boosted because I was traveling for work. He asked if I was traveling to third world countries. I said I was. He asked which ones and I replied, "The US."

He boosted all of my vaccinations and added a couple of others.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, LIBTARDS!”

* Terms and conditions apply.

Tap for spoilerNot applicable to blacks, liberals, queers, leftists, women, convicts, or users of the marijuanas. Sincerely, American Taliban, Guardians of Pedophiles.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] discosnails@lemmy.wtf 4 points 5 months ago

Far out man.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Ah yes, another spectacular "small government" approach from those Conservatives. "Don't tread on me, unless I'm brown/queer/leftist then tread all over"

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›