“Acceptance of the newly proposed rule would mean that no state-legal medical cannabis patient will any longer have to choose between either their medicine or their constitutional right to bear arms.”
Tag: firearms
It’s not only consumers’ 2nd Amendment rights that are under assault. Historically, governments have sought to deny cannabis consumers many other rights as well, including their right to use the medicine that works best for them, or to exercise their freedom to choose to relax with a substance that’s objectively safer than alcohol. And every step of the way, NORML has been there to fight back on their behalf.
“The historical analogs the government identifies concern temporary restrictions on carrying or firing weapons while intoxicated or on persons adjudged dangerous — not blanket bans on all users of a disfavored substance.”
The ATF acknowledges that a change in the federal ban is necessary because there exists a “disconnect” between how federal agencies and the appellate courts are currently interpreting the law.
“Neither past nor current cannabis use should automatically preclude someone from legal protections explicitly provided by the US Constitution.”
The following primer seeks to provide clarity to frequently asked questions surrounding cannabis rescheduling and its policy implications.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. Together, we can help bring an end to one of the most irrational and harmful remnants of federal prohibition and continue to fight for cannabis freedom.
“Neither past nor current cannabis use should automatically preclude someone from legal protections explicitly provided by the US Constitution.”