Caution, Legal Jeopardy Ahead: CBD and Guns

cbd oil gummies

Courtesy Amazon

By Emily Taylor

A new topic that’s sparking conversations nationwide is the legality of cannabidiol or CBD oil. The extract is legal in most states and has become hugely popular. But while many medical patients swear by its healing effects, gun owners nationwide could find CBD oil to be a huge source of pain when it comes to their Second Amendment rights.

What is CBD?

CBD oil, used for medicinal purposes, is spreading like wildfire among people in the United States and abroad. CBD is often synthesized from the oily resin of the cannabis plant to create edibles, gel caps, topicals, beverages, and vape oil cartridges.

The first rendering from hemp plants extracted from a super critical CO2 extraction device on its way to becoming fully refined CBD oil spurts into a large beaker at New Earth Biosciences in Salem, Ore. From skin-care lotions to bottled water, cannabis companies are rolling out a growing array of consumer products infused with a chemical found in marijuana called cannabidiol, or CBD. (AP Photo/Don Ryan, File)

People use these products to treat everything from epilepsy to arthritis. Despite its popularity, it’s very important to realize anything related to cannabis triggers potential criminal liability under both state and federal law.

Federal Classification

Federal law considers cannabis or marijuana a Schedule 1 controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act. This classification under the act equates marijuana with heroin and other hard drugs and states it lacks any medicinal value, has a high potential for abuse, and cannot safely be prescribed.

Whatever the laws are in various states, merely possessing cannabis is a federal misdemeanor punishable by a fine up to $1,000 and/or a year in prison.

(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)

In 2018, the Federal Farm Bill was passed and lifted a ban on hemp production, removing it from the Controlled Substances Act. This effectively cleared the chamber for CBD oils derived from hemp to hit the marketplace. However, federal authorities were quick to point out that any CBD oil products marketed as therapeutic or added to food products were essentially the same as adding a prescription drug and will be regulated similarly.

Let’s take a look at three common misconceptions when it comes to CBD oil.

Misconception #1: CBD is legal in my state, so I have nothing to fear when carrying a firearm

Many people believe that if CBD oil is legal in their state, then they have nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, this is wrong. If you want to remain a legal gun owner, you should pause before you inhale or consume any product containing CBD oil.

If you’re using CBD oil as a treatment plan or have a medical marijuana prescription, you might inadvertently become classified as an unlawful user under federal law. If you are an unlawful user, you would no longer be legally eligible to purchase, own, possess, or transport firearms.

denied 4473 gun purchase social media check

courtesy wikipedia.org

Not only that, but most states require that to be eligible for a handgun license or permit, you must not be prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law. If you’re classified as an unlawful user under federal law, you could become ineligible, or worse yet, you could lose your state-issued handgun license or permit.

Misconception #2: All CBD Oil is the same

People mistakenly believe all CBD oil is created equally and legally. Unfortunately, CBD oil is produced by different companies and some don’t mind bending the rules to move their products quickly. Often times, CBD oil users are surprised to discover their pain relief comes with an unintended ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol or THC.

THC is the psychoactive and intoxicating component found in marijuana and can cause everything from eating too many Doritos to failing a drug test at work.

Not only could a CBD oil user be fired from their job for an honest mistake, but they could also be prosecuted. Many jurisdictions treat THC-laced CBD oil as a controlled substance worthy of a felony charge, no matter how much or how little you may have in your possession when law enforcement discovers it.

Misconception #3: As long as I have my prescription, I can take my CBD into any state

Many people believe that if they have a valid prescription or license to smoke marijuana or CBD oil in their home state, they may legally transport their medicine to another state. This is not true and could land you in hot water in both federal and state court. Hot water that could jeopardize your gun rights.

Just like handgun license reciprocity, you have to follow the laws of the state you find yourself in. That means if marijuana or CBD oil is illegal in the state you’re visiting, you could find yourself in a jail cell for merely possessing either substance.

That’s why the best practice when considering whether to try CBD oil is to do your homework and research the laws of your state before buying CBD oil. Failing to do so could cost you your gun rights and your freedom.

 

Emily Taylor is a program attorney with US LawShield. 

comments

  1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    I contend that #2 is what really matters here. If CBD oil contains THC (> 0.3% w/w), then it is a marijuana derivative under federal statute; if it does not (THC < 0.3% w/w), then it is a hemp derivative, not a marijuana derivative. (Likely a gross over-simplification.)

    TL;DR: if you want to be safe, just get 0% THC-containing CBD oil.

    1. avatar AllArms says:

      Yep, all of this. And, to further add to the idiocy, if you live in a state/territory in the 9th Circuit (Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, Washington), just having a MM card makes you prohibited, regardless of whether you’ve ever actually used MJ.

      1. avatar Richard B Jones says:

        Not true. Mear possession of a marijuana medical card is meaningless. The prohibition is against being a user of a prohibited substance not having some card saying you can use it. There are no checks by ATF against any state data bases of medical cards. Maybe there should be, but that’s not the law.

        1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          The law is that you’re prohibited if you’re addicted to *or a habitual user of* a controlled substance. 18 USC 922 G 3

          I wouldn’t want to be the person trying to argue that I’m not a habitual user even though I have a MM card. Maybe they check, maybe not.

        2. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

          There was a case on that and the courts ruled that a lady who had a medical mj card but had never acquired or used any mj was prohibited.

    2. avatar arc - the annoyance. says:

      Problem right now is a lot of labs can’t measure low THC %.

    3. avatar Thixotropic says:

      NOT exactly.

      CBD Oil extract from Cannabis contains about what you indicate or a little more of THCs just due to the processes used and the difficulty to extract that little bit without effecting the medicinal content. It does NOT contain enough THC to make you ‘high’, but to give you just a sort of warm glow that helps most pain patients. THC spiking of CBD is another topic and yes you have to beware.

      CBD extract from Hemp is generally useless.

      1. avatar madmax3.6 says:

        You are 100% right! To really reap the benefits of CDB oil it has to contain a certain percentage of THC.The THC works synergistically with the CDB oil to give you the benefits.If it contains less than 1% THC,you are wasting your money.Too bad alot of CDB oil retailers are scamming people with a worthless product!!!

        1. avatar rt66paul says:

          Rubbing castor oil or olive oil(maybe even motor oil or WD40?) into the skin around stiff joints works. Why would you spend 20 or 30x as much for cannabis oil for the same relief?

  2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    I have said before and was chastised for saying this same thing. There have been people that failed drug tests and lost their jobs from using CBD products that were bought over the counter.

    1. avatar Richard B Jones says:

      They did not lose jobs because of CBD but because the product used contained THC.

    2. avatar rt66paul says:

      Just eating a poppy seed bakery good is enough to give you a dirty test. If they tighten down the test enough, they can find anything, even use from another that you got from being close by.
      Getting an expert to check an impairment might be a better way to go about this, but for many, this is just a witch hunt or a way to fire workers(no unemployment benefits) rather than laying them off.

  3. avatar Rusty - Always Carry - Chains says:

    Everywhere you turn in my area there is another billboard pushing CBD this or that. Snake oil as far as I am concerned.

    1. avatar Rad Man says:

      Agreed, be a grown up and avoid the crap. Now we can move on to the next gun related worry.

      1. avatar Jb says:

        “ Agreed, be a grown up and avoid the crap. Now we can move on to the next gun related worry.”

        So even if someone is using cbd with 0.0% thc medicinally, they are “children”?

        Sounds like something Pfizer would say.

      2. avatar S.Crock says:

        Usually grown ups with legitimate reasons to use it are the only ones who want to use CBD. Their old knees or back are hurting and they want some relief.

  4. avatar I’m Ron Burgundy? says:

    I guess it’s a good thing to only do acid (battery acid) and liquid paper. Both substances are not controlled and they don’t test for this. J/K, just kidding. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME.

  5. avatar Dog of War says:

    If Trump is going to use executive orders I’d suggest he use one to just finally sort out the MJ question. Prohibition of the stuff has failed, it’s time to just sort it out already.

    1. avatar Shire-man says:

      I’m all for ending prohibition but not before I have some rock solid guarantees I will be insulated from the voting habits of pot-heads. As it is now my life is subjected to the electoral whim of far too many frightened, stupid and selfish people.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        I would rather they were high then drunk when they pull the lever in the voting booth.

        Give five guys a bottle of bourbon and they’ll start a fight, give them a bag of pot and they’ll start a rock band.

        1. avatar Weapon Of War says:

          Hahaha! Liked that one!

        2. avatar Chris says:

          The majority do not use pot, the majority do use alcohol. This is a issue the majority got pulled into because of the minority who use it and the minority fooled many in the majority as it was non-users who voted in legal rec in all states that passed it. The idea of your area getting tax revs that you don’t have to pay for was the mousetrap. If only users voted yes legal wouldn’t have passed in any state. The minority are trying to dictate where this goes and in the end it will be the majority who crush this communist push for drug legalization and promotion.

        3. avatar madmax3.6 says:

          A man after my own heart!!!

        4. avatar Nickel Plated says:

          Chris:

          “Fooled”?

          I’m sure there’s plenty of non users who supported legalization for their own specific reasons. Not because they were “fooled”. How about the fact that the War on Marijuana has been a huge drain on our tax dollars and freedoms for no gain or change at all.
          I smoke weed, and frankly legalization is pretty far down on my list of issues I care about when it comes time to vote. Purely because most politicians who support legalization also hold positions contrary to mine on other bigger issues. And in the end it’s a kinda pointless isuue to base your vote on. MJ has been illegal for many decades now where I live. So what? I can call up 3 different people RIGHT NOW, 2 of them will deliver to my house within the hour. The 3rd can have it for me when I see him at work tomorrow. Legalization is a moot point for me.
          Why vote for a liberal only because they promise something that, even if the fullfilled their promise, would make practically no change in my day to day life and something I would end up getting eventually regardless. It’s pretty much guaranteed that weed will become legalized sooner or later anyway. Why sell yourself out over it?

      2. avatar Ing says:

        All the potheads who were going to vote are already doing it. There is no insulation.

    2. avatar John Bryan says:

      I’d much prefer Congress do the job their oath obligates it’s members to do and pass the laws necessary to regulate marijuana in a similar way to alcohol. More EOs is a way to fix this but it lets Congress weasel out of doing it the right way. One barrier is the need for a reliable, non-invasive roadside test for THC intoxication – once that’s developed and the federal laws are changed it would be each state’s prerogative to deal with marijuana use and legality. The current patchwork of laws and regulations is a tangled mess – which is what happens when you disregard the manner in which a federal republic is supposed to operate.

      1. avatar Delta795 says:

        THC doesn’t work like ethanol. With ethanol, decades of observation have given us some pretty reliable guidelines of how much impairment results from a given level of alcohol in the bloodstream. With THC, we have nearly zero close observations of impairment correlated to THC levels in the bloodstream. What tiny amount we have strongly indicates that serum levels and impairment vary wildly from person to person. Some states are using a magical 5ng/mL level as indicative of impairment but studies by law enforcement agencies themselves cast great doubt on this (arbitrary and likely pulled out of some policymaker’s ass) number, meaning that it may well have trouble meeting the Daubert standard for admissibility at trial.

        1. avatar John Bryan says:

          Until there is a change in the federal laws and a test as simple as a roadside BAC test it doesn’t really matter what standard is adopted. When the laws are changed it’ll probably take several court cases to establish some precedent for legal levels of THC induced impairment. I have absolutely no dog in this fight other than wanting some kind of consensus on how to treat marijuana use consistent with current case law, social conventions and the manner in which our Republic’s lawmaking process is supposed to function. I rarely use alcohol much less THC – which I never use – though I have witnessed the havoc that abuses of either can wreak on families and individuals. Quite frankly we could go back to 100% marijuana prohibition and it would have little personal meaning to me – as long as it’s prohibited by proper due legislative process consistent with the USC, with each state determining their process at the local level. Either way the current situation is a dysfunctional mess that creates more problems than it solves while continuing the public’s trend of contempt for the rule of law.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          The real issue here is that the states don’t understand the chemistry of what’s actually being done and mostly don’t care because that ignorance brings in revenue.

          A roadside breath test tells you the concentration of alcohol exhaled which is a pretty good proxy for actual BAC. The larger and more accurate (as well as precise) machines at the station do the same thing.

          But you will find that many blood tests taken at the same time, will have higher results because they test for alcohol and metabolites of alcohol, essentially adding up all alcohol injested in the last 72 hours.

          THC urine tests are 5-14 days behind real time and have the same problem. Many blood tests do as well. Now, the inactive metabolites can be screened out but this is expensive and few bother to do it. The result is that THC tests for concentration are, generally, inaccurate garbage that will yield a positive test at a higher-than-reality concentration sometimes for weeks after the person stops using marijuana.

          My dad actually figured out a bunch of this instrumentation chemistry back in the 1980’s but it was and still is impractical due to expense and, really, complicated enough that you probably done want anyone with less than Master’s in Chemistry doing it if legal outcomes are on the line because it’s easy to make a mistake, again with the expense.

      2. avatar daveinwyo says:

        Safe, non invasive test:
        If your caught doing 75 in a 45 speed zone, your most likely to be drunk.
        If your caught stalled in the median strip, your most likely stoned.

    3. avatar jakee308 says:

      I don’t believe that Trump can negate an actual law. The various states go by the written law/statute and an EO wouldn’t change that.

      The law is very tricky like that. Every word and punctuation must be parsed very very carefully and even then folks have been known to get in trouble.s

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        Trump could deprioritize the enforcement and tell DOJ, DEA, etc not to investigate, prosecute, or otherwise try to curtail it. It would remain illegal, but nobody would be arrested for it, and they probably wouldn’t be charged unless it was an add-on for other federal crime. State and local laws would still apply, US Attorneys could drop any charges referred to them.

        1. avatar Ragnar says:

          Except, certain entities (leftist state governments) would ignore the illegal but ignored option when it came time to deny a person their right to keep and bear arms.

          Everyone can toke, but if you own guns, BUSTED!

    4. avatar Chris says:

      The president CANNOT re or deschedule marijuana.
      It requires the AG to comply with international treaties when making scheduling decisions. 21 USC section 811(d).
      AG cannot reschedule a drug for abusive or recreational use period. It’s so much more complicated than we could ever discuss here but in the end it would be a 2-3 year process of arguing law just to get it legally viable for review.
      Honestly after a few more years of this pro weed nonsense IMO it will have peaked as a issue and more and more citizens will go against legalization.

      1. avatar Nickel Plated says:

        Kinda like legal alcohol peaked and now everyone is clamoring for prohibition again?

  6. avatar former water walker says:

    Well I may or may not have used CBD. Had a free sample straw-or not. Didn’t theoretically do me or someone I may know anything but a mild buzz. Many years ago(like 37-48) I partook of the herb. In the latter years it was “modern” super potent ganja. And now there are millions of idiot’s wrecking their brains & bodies. Use CBD at your own risk. It’s unregulated and could contain virtually ANYTHING…

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      Right, that’s why one should just use the herb as God intended. Plant it, grow it, consume it.

      As we read in Genesis,
      “Behold, I give you all herb bearing seed, for it shall be as meat unto you.“

      1. avatar former water walker says:

        So that’s what’s wrong with you Minor…you’re a doper. And a pissy troll.

        1. avatar paul says:

          One of the problems with all plants is the refining and distillation of them. Alcohol fermented naturally(4-18%) is one thing, but when it is stronger, it creates more problems. Poppies, used as they were used 1000 years ago was one thing, but tricking the flowers to make more sap(opium), distilling the sap into morphine or heroin, made it to much.
          Marijuana in a plant form is one thing, but breeding, making hashish, oils, etc., just makes it much more potent.
          I smoked it in the 60s and 70s, but when the high powered stuff came out, it was too much. Then people started to get violent over the weed and profits. It was not that important to me, so I stopped. It wasn’t fun anymore.

      2. avatar Chris says:

        That verse is referring to food, you’d know that if you knew the bible.

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    I understand that Joe Biden uses CDB oil for memory enhancement. It works like a charm.

  8. avatar NORDNEG says:

    If the states weren’t after the tax money they get from every sale , it would still be illegal.
    It’s exactly like alcohol, some people can handle it & some can’t.
    It’s caused lots of problems for law enforcement & crime has gone up because of use.
    Like I said, if not for the Tax money the states get it would still be illegal.

    “””FREE KYLE”””

    1. avatar Jumbo says:

      Do you really believe crime has gone up because of CBD? It would be the same as the dems outlawing semi autos then arresting people for having them saying crime went up. Crime should be considered something that violates someone else’s rights property crimes, violence, and such other then that we should be free to guard our marijuana fields with full auto ak’s…. who’s it hurting?

      1. avatar Chris says:

        Overall it’s the promotion and acceptance of drug use being normal in our society. That’s never a good thing. And it’s not even really about legality it’s about morality for me. I chose not to use, you can chose to use, but you also have to be willing to accept the responsibility and consequences of that use.

        1. avatar Nickel Plated says:

          It seems however that we are not free to choose to use since people like you seem so hellbent on making that choice for us by threat of arrest and prison.

  9. avatar Sam I Am says:

    Caveat Emptor.

  10. avatar Manse Jolly says:

    I understand it has helped some with advanced arthritis as a topical.

    Especially those of an advanced age.

    1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Yup. I got some for my 96 year old mom. She has flareups of arthritis.
      She rubs some on her wrists and hands before bed.
      She swears by it. And, I can get it almost anywhere cbd is sold so, no card and no records.

  11. avatar Bemused Berserker says:

    ATF form 4473 specifically states that prescribed or recreational doesn’t matter, nor do the State’s laws surrounding it’s legal use apply, when it asks the question if you are a user or addicted to marijuana or its derivatives. So someone has to lie at that question, which means they’re now committing two felonies.
    Until marijuana is removed from the list of Schedule I Controlled Substances at the Federal level, it’ll remain illegal for a gun owner to use.
    Personally, it made me paranoid as Hell 40+ years ago when I was in High School, that I didn’t enjoy the sensation and effects at all. Haven’t touched it since.

    1. avatar Jerms says:

      Honest question: what if you say “no” to the marijuana question, get a gun, then start using a year later? Maybe you cant get a new gun but does the form say to turn in your gun should you decide to use?

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “….but does the form say to turn in your gun should you decide to use?”

        No, just as the form doesn’t require one to turn in guns if subsequently violating any other law that would thus make one a prohibited person. Which is the problem with background checks in the first place. Legal today, felon tomorrow. The background check system cannot deal with that.

      2. avatar former water walker says:

        Soooo…do you ever cheat on your taxes? Wife? Exceed the speed limit? Who’s checking on that 4473? The pot po-leece?!? Already paranoid from all that ganja??? Turn yourself in fella😃😀😎

    2. avatar Richard B Jones says:

      “question if you are a user or addicted to marijuana or its derivatives” That’s not the question asked. This is the question:” Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”
      CBD is not a controlled substance. No reference to “derivatives.”

  12. avatar Anton Solomyr says:

    The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly enumerate a specific power allowing for the Federal Government to regulate substances for consumption (they did briefly with the 18th Amendment regarding alcohol, subsequently nullified with the 21st Amendment, so that no longer holds sway), so therefore must be relegated to the states, or the people, respectively.

    That doesn’t stop them, however.

    1. avatar AC says:

      This article is written by Emily Taylor, an attorney from US Law Shield, so not really surprised to see that she mentions “Second Amendment right” as if to imply this is where we get our Right to bear arms. But in point of fact, neither the Constitution nor the Second Amendment gives us any Right to have a firearm. And to imply such would mean that this Right comes from the government. However, the government does not grant us any Rights. Government can only grant privileges which they can then regulate and also take away. The purpose and the intent of the Second Amendment is to declare a prohibition on the exercise of power and authority by the government in cases involving any kind of interference or “infringement” on what was considered an accepted and recognized God given Right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment is written in the form of a “command directive” to the government that states very simply; “the Right of the people to keep and bear arms Shall Not be infringed”. And until such time as an another amendment is passed that directly addresses this provision of our Constitution and which alters and changes the very clear and precise words and meaning of the Second Amendment, it stands today as originally written and remains as the Supreme Law of the Land. Just as in the case of Prohibition when it became the Law of the Land after the passage of the 18th Amendment creating the ban on alcohol which could not be ended or even altered or changed in any way by the Congress or the President but could only be undone by the passage of another constitutional amendment and which did not happen until with the passage of the 21st Amendment. It is important to understand that an amendment permanently alters and changes the original document because under the rules of contract law the amendment overrides and “supersedes” the terms and the conditions of the original document. And any conflict that may exist between the two shall and must always be ruled in favor of the amendment as the new terms and conditions of the amendment must always prevail over and above any terms or provisions of the original document because the amendment always overrides and “supersedes” everything that came before it.

      The mistakes we make in understanding how the law is suppose to work and in how it is required to be applied have cost us dearly. Like in the case of cannabis, we allowed the government to criminalize it (a natural plant known for centuries to have many beneficial uses and even used widely by the Colonists and having such recognized value that it was even accepted as payment for taxes). And then when we finally get around to reversing this act of criminalizing cannabis we settle for having government “legalizing” it instead of “decriminalizing” it. With the difference being that under legalization the government still gets to regulate and profit from its production and sale whereas if cannabis were decriminalized then there simply would no longer be any crime attached to its possession or use and therefore there would be no need for any kind of government involvement regarding any aspect of possession or use of cannabis.

      Black’s Law Dictionary defines the word “License” as; “Permission to do something that would otherwise be illegal or prohibited”. And so this means that everything that requires a license is something which the government has deemed to be “illegal” and therefore now made subject to the rules, regulations and the payment of fees as imposed by the government. We have in many cases made the mistake of converting a God given natural Right into a government granted privilege and have in the process saddled ourselves with the burden of all manner of extra government regulation.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Second Amendment right”

        Merely shorthand for “right protected by the Second Amendment”.

        You can exercise your natural, civil and human rights, but there will be consequences for exercising those rights in contravention to standing laws.

        “We the People” have spoken, through our representative form of government, and declared and codified that inalienable rights aren’t, and neither are unalienable rights.

        Politial (including judicial) power is real, and effective power. A sacred document has no power of its own.

    2. avatar tdiinva says:

      The 21st Amendment prohibits the Federal Government from regulating the consumption of alcohol. It also enshrines in the Constitution the individual State’s right to do so. Arguably, this applies to all drugs.

  13. avatar Mike Carbine says:

    Hmm…sounds like snake oil. Even Rush is shilling this stuff. There are many ways to lose your #2A, the majority are little known. With the way Fed Gov entities can whip up legally binding regulations at a whim, who knows what all is “illegal” at anyone time?

    Yet, if you the common man run afoul and are ‘indicted'(not even convicted) of a charge(misdemeanors too, not just felonies) of more than one year, it’s a one-way ticket to “prohibited person” status, permanently. Like a 2nd DUI, think before you drink people.

  14. avatar Does shall not be infringed mean anything, anymore? Convention of states will fix these overlords! says:

    Yes, no, they don’t know! How many Rotten thieving Politicians take drugs and have guns??? Drug test them first!!!%

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Convention of states will fix these overlords! ”

      How, precisely?

    2. avatar Josh says:

      Laws only apply to us little peasants not the ruling elite.

  15. avatar Anymouse says:

    CBD can be derived from hemp and have no THC or other psychoactive chemicals, which means it isn’t a Schedule I drug. It’s kind of like near beer, except the THC was never present and didn’t need to be removed. Think caffeine in black vs. herbal tea. The main danger for guns is that an untrustworthy supplier could use MJ as a source and have THC as an unlabeled ingredient. A health danger is that CBD isn’t proven to have the benefits and lack of side effects that are being claimed. It belongs with cryotherapy, copper infused garments, magnets, cupping, colonics, and other alternative “medicine” pseudoscience hooey.

    1. avatar Chris says:

      Almost all cbd products contain thc limits over federal guidelines. In mid 2019 FDA did random testing and found over 50% of claimed 100% thc free products had illegal amounts of thc, the early 2020 FDA testing found slightly higher amounts more often. Now we can argue if thc should be legal or not forever but facts are if you take a cbd product you’re almost guaranteed to have thc in your system. I care about my gun rights more than a supposed right to get high or right to snake oil medicines.

  16. avatar BobS says:

    When I was a California resident our then-LtGov Newsom campaigned hard in 2016 for (simultaneously) the Governor’s Mansion, Proposition 63 (criminalize lots of guns and gun-related stuff), and Proposition 64 (legalize marijuana).

    In a Facebook town-hall meeting, I asked whether, presuming Proposition 64 passed, he would exert California’s considerable influence at the Federal regulatory level to remove cannabis from DEA Schedule 1, so it could be removed from the list of disqualifiers on ATF Form 4473 question 21(e).

    He ignored my question. Both Propositions passed, and he was selected two years later to ascend to the throne.

  17. avatar Still California Kid says:

    I have arthritis but I will not use CBD oils because I also have an FFL. If a police agency or the ATF want to shut me down I will not give them anymore rope than they already have. It is legal in my state, but you never know when someone will call the cops and and anti-gun cop who wants to score political points will find a cream and shut you down or report you to the ATF. I know of a guy who sold reloading equipment at his licensed business who had the fire marshall show up at his house and weigh his gunpowder to see if he exceeded the 20 lb limit California has. He did not exceeds it but anti-gun cities will do anything to shut you down.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Got another one for you. Did you know that it’s illegal in most California jurisdictions to store more than 25 gallons of spare gasoline without a permit and full fireproof cabinet? If you’re a typical prepper and have five 5-gal cans to be able to G.O.O.D. in an emergency or run a genny after an earthquake or power outage, but have an additional 1-gal can with your lawnmower, if your house burns down and an Auditor finds all the cans, your homeowners insurance will likely get out of paying because you were technically committing a criminal act.

      I had to split up my gas cans between two residences…

    2. avatar Richard B Jones says:

      Your contention is simply not true. It’s federally illegal to sell or distribute products ingested as food or medicine containing CBD as it is currently not approved by the FDA. It’s not a controlled substance not is it illegal to possess. No effect on firearms possession.

  18. avatar Chris says:

    Not a single study available that proves any chemical from hemp/marijuana helps with any alignment. It’s mostly just a tax and money maker, similar to brain pills and the other snake oils many try to legitimize that were never needed throughout history but for some reason we need them now. The legal push is just another tactic not for rights and freedoms but to dumb down society even more and make big gov a more favorable thing among citizens.
    Make a choice, guns or weed.

    1. avatar Larry says:

      Except of course there’s GW Pharma, a billion dollar drug company with a cannabis CBD extract that is FDA approved for epilepsy. And Marinol, a THC based drug from Solvay, another billion dollar pharma that was FDA approved decades ago. And there’s several more in the FDA approval pipeline.

      But apart from THC and CBD being FDA approved and prescribed in the US for years, zero studies or evidence at all. Sure thing, pal.

  19. avatar enuf says:

    I’ll stick with Rem Oil in my guns. Last thing I wanna see is my boomsticks munching down on Doritos.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Okay, that was a good one. You get a golf clap.

  20. avatar possum says:

    Marijuana is illegal because Cocaine makes black guys rape white weman.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Marijuana is illegal because Harry Anslinger hated and feared Mexicans.

      I think it was a bad taco that did it.

    2. avatar KenW says:

      You almost said the version that we learned to figure out the value of a resistor.
      Black boys rape our young white girls but violet gives willingly.
      Still remember that as well as black to brass to save your ass.

      1. avatar Old and need that performance enhancer Biden uses KenW says:

        added white girls was just girls, but it was over 40 years ago I last used that memomic,

  21. avatar John in AK says:

    Look, I saw the movie.

    First, you start wearing ’30s suits and snap-brim Fedoras. Then, you grow a pencil-thin moustache–male or female, doesn’t matter. The insane giggling, the constant repetition of phrases, the fascination with rapid piano-playing always follows. Then the sex with women. Or men. The inevitable hit-and-run vehicular homicide, the one-shot-kill accidental shooting, and the awful ending of death and/or prison comes shortly thereafter. Malt shop, Ivy-League college, career in banking or insurance or certified accounting, all gone.

    You hoodlums need to learn to live within The Law, and stop using that CQB stuff or whatever it is.

  22. avatar Don from CT says:

    Just about the only benefit of Joe Biden winning the presidency, which unfortunately is going to happen, is the decriminalization of marijuana.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email