Shadow rider
6.5 Creedmoor
BUT...if they are looking for an excuse...
You cannot buy marijuana in New York State and also buy or possess a firearm!
- Thread starter BerettaGuy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 4473 legalized marijuana
BUT...if they are looking for an excuse...
spat
.950 JDJ
Who knew the guys running those dispensaries were smoking *that much* pot....
And with all the food he's eating, Danny Wegman must be orca fat.
stokes
.338 Win Mag
In Mass the law specifically says it is illegal to purchase for someone else.Not sure what NY will do but I have already heard about smoking in public being ok in NY, in Mass its not allowed.In fact, when you make a purchase they show you what you have, put it in a zippered pouch and it is illegal to transport if the package is opened before you get home.If you want to transport it from your house it has to be in its original packaging, with all labeling intact.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
don't know about the ATVing part .. but i have heard this applies to asking a farmer to hunt on his land .. the farmer is not responsible if you trip over
over a dead furrow and break your ankle and other accidents during hunting on said land.
spat
.950 JDJ
So, open container law for pot ?
And "Marijuana purchase logs" aren't a thing of course.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
this will get you arrested in NY with your prescribed drugs or vitamins if in your car when driving ...
Don't be so sure about that. It could be done in 15 minutes as long as they have the data sets. I'll defer to Rambam's 2nd law on this one:
"Any information that can be used will be misused"
haha yeppers
I blocked (put on ignore list, cannot block someone actually) you some time ago, but still read what you write mostly with a click of a button. So your flattery is valid....
Truth be told I forgot why I did add you to the list...
this will get you arrested in NY with your prescribed drugs or vitamins if in your car when driving ...
For real?
Sort of like how NSA warrantless surveillance isn't a thing? I don't trust the govt. one bit when it comes to this.
Robin
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Then why do you want more of it? Yer full of crap!
Robin
Robin
spat
.950 JDJ
It won't be done until someone decides they want to impress their boss with a big list of "collars".
Everyone remember why they went after the branch davidians.
It'll happen like that.
Xae289
.223 Rem
To paraphrase Brandon Herrera, that's the face he makes when watching other men do his wife in front of him.
OwnTheRide
.223 Rem
The point I was making was that possessing weed doesn't necessarily mean a person is a user of marijuana.
The question on the 4473 does not ask if you buy, possess, manufacture, sell, or paid tax on marijuana. It asks if you are a user. Amusingly, if you possess but are not a user, you would be committing a crime to answer yes on that question.
I'm stating the facts. As for your ridiculous assertion that only a user would possess, there will very soon be plenty of "reasonable reasons to buy and possess" without being a user. For example, everyone in the weed business. Farmers, wholesale, retail, marketing. It will also be legal for, say, you to go pick up some weed for your wife.
Think about it. I don't drink wine, but I buy a few cases of it every year. The law should not presume that possession equates to use. In most cases, it does not. For quite a while, when it comes to weed, it likely will.
stokes
.338 Win Mag
Are you sure about that? In Mass its not. A friend who does use it was picking up his order and had a question about some CBD concoction he was picking up for his wife,as soon as he mentioned it being for his wife the girl took it out of the bag and set it aside and told him its illegal for him to buy for someone else and illegal for her to sell it to him if she knows.She eventually gave it to him but he had to say he lied about it being for someone else.Not sure about other states or what NY will do when it starts.
TEOTWAWKI inc.
.338 Win Mag
NYS official determination:
C'mon man. Just pay the tax. We can figure the rest out later.
OwnTheRide
.223 Rem
There is certainly a lot of unknown in NY right now, but here is what we do know: right now, it is perfectly legal for person A to give person B up to three ounces of weed at a time, so long as no money exchanges hands.
I don't expect that to change. As such, I expect it to be completely legal for person A to buy weed on behalf of person B, once purchasing is legal.
Could be, but that doesn't mean you cannot be found guilty of lying on the 4473, or being a user in possession. The purchase is simply the indicator that will start the investigation. It wouldn't be hard to show a person is a user. This is very basic investigative stuff here.
OwnTheRide
.223 Rem
Enlighten us, then.
How about an investigator following you and getting you on video smoking the weed you just bought?
As I said, this is elementary stuff. You won't fool the feds if they want to make a case out of it.
Now you've done it
I saw a pothead on a major busy roadway recently playing with a bag of weed and handling a glass pipe. Looked like she was trying to pack the pipe for a nice smoke and drive session. She was all over the road. The lane she was in turned into an on ramp for the thruway and she had to drive through a striped off area to get back onto the roadway. These people aren't that bright and won't be hard to catch. Very few will be able to wait until they get home to light up.
Bob
6.5 Creedmoor
All the coke he does is what keeps him skinny.
OwnTheRide
.223 Rem
This entire conversation has been set in the context of "purchase or possession does not equate to use" - see the thread title. You're talking about someone actually using. We diverged at some point here. I am not advocating for unlawful behavior, I am talking about the facts concerning what the 4473 actually says, and why possession or purchase of marijuana does not obligate a person to answer "yes" to whether or not they are an unlawful user of or addicted to marijuana.How about an investigator following you and getting you on video smoking the weed you just bought?
As to your discussion of an actual user, I suppose that would depend on the person. I don't drink much, but I don't abstain from alcohol, either. Someone would have to spend a whole lot of investigative resources to prove that I was not a teetotaler, and I really doubt they'd succeed without somehow getting cameras in my house. So, even with the revised context of an actual user, I remain skeptical that it "wouldn't be hard to show a person is a user." Furthermore, we both know the government doesn't have the resources to send federal investigators following gun owners around trying to catch them lighting up... this is an entirely unrealistic scenario.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
I thought it was by prescription only for a legal transaction . I thought he Possession and growing it is what has been legalized