So right now the Supreme Court is hearing an argument of if marijaunna users can legally own guns. The short answer is yes, but the long answer is slightly more complicated.

Most people make the bank argument that drinkers can own Guns, so why not pot heads? The agree, but that’s not what we’re looking at. What we should be looking at is the laws that call out pot in the first place. As a guy who has bought guns, one of the questions asked if “do you use marijaunna illegally” which should not even be asked for two reasons. First, government is denying you your right to the 5th amendment in an attempt to violate your second. it also violates the 4th admendment as well.

So the problem was never what type of drug you ingest, rather the criminal background to begin with and the government infringing on your rights.

I would argue that anyone that doesn’t have a criminal charge and has bought a gun with a background check is entitled by the second admendment to process said fire arm. The problem here though, is that if you get busted after the fact, you’re gonna catch an extra charge

Given the current change in demeanor towards weed, you have to keep in mind the 10th admendment as well. Which states, anything not laid out by the constitution, is up to the states and the people to decide.

So I believe it would be erroneous on the court to not decide yes in the case of Ali Danial Hemani. 

Stay metal 🤘