297
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] frezik 69 points 1 day ago

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.

[-] _stranger_@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

The ambiguity serves their cause. I expected for them to give a vague ruling that keeps people worried. The nazis running the government want fear, uncertainty, and doubt because it makes people easier to control. This ruling will be "Sure, go ahead, we prob won't disappear you and your family for no reason at all, trust us, and stay in line"

[-] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours 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.

[-] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 day ago

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 6 points 1 day ago

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

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

[-] bambam@piefed.social 1 points 5 hours ago

Its not difficult to prove if you have a medicinal cannabis card. Not at all. All your purchases are prescribed and tracked.

[-] frezik 2 points 4 hours ago

Were you using it when you bought the gun? How long ago did you imbibe before then? What even is the time limit? Does your use count as addiction?

Is a federal prosecutor going to bother even pursuing those questions if they have to prove it in front of a judge and jury?

There's so many ways a defense attorney could pick the case apart. They're generally not going to prosecute this as the primary charge.

[-] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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.

[-] frezik 3 points 1 day ago

Mostly, yes. That said, a change would actually be less of a problem for leftists arming up.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

My local weed store tracks user's purchases. I think every store i know of in NJ does.

[-] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago

Well, sure, but that doesn't automatically mean the ATF has access to that.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago

They can buy that info from data traffickers.

[-] NateNate60@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In the past, the Supreme Court has ruled that penalising someone for failing to file or omitting information on a form which would incriminate them violates Amendment 5.

The case was regarding a tax imposed on gambling. People who ran gambling operations had to pay a tax of 10% of the amounts wagered and register with the IRS. At this time, gambling was illegal (almost) nationwide. The IRS then made those registration records available to gaming authorities, who would use them to prosecute anyone who registered.

The court ruled that forcing them to register and then providing this information to gaming authorities to prosecute people violated Amendment 5, and thus a person so convicted for failing to register could assert an Amendment 5 privilege against conviction.

Edit: Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39

this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
297 points (100.0% liked)

News

32852 readers
2383 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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