Subscribe To the GunsAmerica Digest and News This Week

New FFL Form 4473 for Background Checks Incoming

Send to Kindle
form-4473-new-2017-nics

The new form includes more details concerning the law and procedures. (Photo: ATF)

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or more commonly the ATF has announced an update to Form 4473, the background check form. All Federal firearms licensees or FFLs will have to switch to the form on Jan. 16, 2017. The previous form, drafted in 2012, will no longer be accepted from that point on.

Anyone buying from or transferring a firearm through an FFL will have to fill out this updated form. The bulk of the changes to the form are small clarifications to how the background check questions are phrased but one change stands out noticeably.

Question 11.e asks if the person filling out the background check is “An unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana” among other controlled substances. It has a new warning that points out that marijuana use remains “Unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes” under state law.

This change reflects the ATF’s longstanding position that local laws don’t supersede the federal laws the ATF is tasked to interpret and enforce. As long as there are federal laws that criminalize the consumption or possession of marijuana it will be illegal for cannabis users to purchase firearms.

form-4473-new-2017-decriminalized-marijuana-still-illegal

In case there was any confusion — agree with it or not, says the ATF, right on the 4473. (Photo: ATF)

It’s not a legally gray area even if the enforcement of these and similar laws can sometimes be difficult or even impossible in these municipalities. This supports recent case law as well.

Recently the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal laws that prohibit drug users from purchasing firearms still apply to marijuana users, even in states where marijuana use has been decriminalized for medical or recreational use.

See Also: Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Says No to Guns for Medical Marijuana Users

Other changes to the form include a new format for filling out names for the background check process. Anyone with no middle name will have to mark the form NMN and anyone with only a middle initial must mark their initial with IO for initial only. Additionally, anyone with a name suffix like junior or senior will be required to include that information as well.

The new form uses the stricter term “sex” instead of “gender” for the purposes of identification and includes language detailing federal laws and definitions to help people correctly fill out the form. The updated form also includes instructions on how to proceed if a transfer is initially denied then overturned.

Legal experts at Orchid Advisors have a detailed list of the changes which number in the dozens. “If you have additional questions regarding the revised Form 4473, please contact your local ATF office. A listing may be found online (https://www.atf.gov/contact/atf-field-divisions).”

The new forms can be found online on the ATF website.

{ 245 comments… add one }
  • Russ November 27, 2016, 4:29 pm

    Check out GUN SHOW BANDIT to see how Washington abuses the law. Come and get my AMERICAN protection anytime you feel up to it. This AMERICAN will be waiting!

  • Joseph November 23, 2016, 6:02 pm

    They will figure out a way to take your gun.. if you drink a glass of milk… live and let live… no felonies… no violent record… then leave us alone… my lord a bunch of haters…. navy joseph

  • Joseph November 23, 2016, 5:57 pm

    Your all a bunch of idiots… their figure out ways to take your gun if you drink a glass of milk… omg…. live and let live… pro gun navy airman…..

  • Albert Scialo November 20, 2016, 6:59 pm

    It”s funny they say this{ ATF’s longstanding position that local laws don’t supersede the federal laws } then why then they allow states to make NFA items illegal under state law ?

  • jake November 20, 2016, 12:09 pm

    CHIP! CHIP! CHIP! CHIP!
    WAKE UP YOU GUYS!
    that is the sound of the government chipping away at your rights. this has nothing to do with the cannabis plant! it has everything to do with dividing the gun community and !!!INFRINGING!!! on the rights of citizens. this is a test to see if we will turn on each other. smaller numbers of gun owners are easier to control and manipulate, we need every one on shit like this.
    WE ALL KNOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL DO EVERYTHING IN ITS POWER TO ERODE OUR RIGHTS!
    DO NOT BE FOOLED AND DO NOT TURN ON YOUR FELLOW 2ND AMENDMENT SUPPORTERS. WE ALL NEED EACH OTHER TO KEEP OUR RIGHTS! THE FACT IS THAT THIS IS A SMOKE SCREEN (no pun intended) AND WAY TOO MANY OF US ARE TAKING THE BAIT. YOU CAN NOT STOP LEGALIZATION AT THIS POINT OR CHILDREN FROM TRYING IT BUT YOU CAN STOP THE FEDS FROM STRIPPING THE RIGHTS AWAY FROM MORE then HALF A GENERATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE AND BABY BOOMERS AS WELL. WE NEED OUR NUMBERS STRONG TO KEEP OUR RIGHTS. STAY STRONG AND UNITED IN ANY ATTEMPTED TO STRIP THE RIGHTS FROM CITIZENS EVEN IF IT WONT AFFECT YOU AT THIS MOMENT I ASSURE YOU IT WILL AFFECT YOU IN THE LONG RUN. STAND AND FIGHT! SOON YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO SHOW YOUR GENITALS AND PRODUCE A PISS SAMPLE TO BUY A FIREARM AND THAT SAMPLE WILL NEED AT LEAST A 30 DAY WAITING PERIOD WHILE YOUR SAMPLE IS TESTED AT A LAB… LIKE IT OR NOT(i do not) CANNABIS IS HERE TO STAY BUT DO NOT LET THE FED TURN IT INTO A TOOL TO DISARM CITIZENS. STAND TOGETHER ON THE BIGGER PICTURE. NO MORE INFRINGEMENT!

    • jerry c November 22, 2016, 7:23 am

      you are spot on. i have never drank,smoked ciggarettes or tried marajauna,but what people do is there own business
      abuse of prescribed drugs is way more than alcohol or marajuana,just be a responsible citizen,everthing in moderation
      care about your fellow citizens,and thank god trump was elected

    • Mike November 23, 2016, 12:37 pm

      This is all about taking our rights. AS LONG AS MY rights are not enfringed. Meaning if u drink and get liver disease or smoke pot and get lung disease I DONT want to pay for it then its ok

  • John W November 19, 2016, 9:02 pm

    This references to the Gun a Control Act of 1968. The same law that gave us the 4473 also has in it reference to marijuana use. It states any user of marijuana is forbidden to possess a firearm.

  • poisonokie November 19, 2016, 7:40 pm

    This prohibition against drug use has been on the Federal BATFE Explosives Licensee and Permittee forms for years – at least since the 1970’s, and probably since about 1966. This is currently Form 5400.13/5400.16. Since explosive license/permit applicants are a far smaller group, and MJ legalization wasn’t an issue at the time, most firearms owners wouldn’t be aware of it. It’s nothing new at all – just a clarification now that many states are legalizing cannabis use. BATFE is a Federal agency, and must adhere to federal law, regardless of changes in individual state laws. It’s actually better that they point it out up front, and not spring it on some hapless citizen after the fact. The enforcement of this statute would likely be used in the case of a criminal misuse or possession of a firearm, where it could be used to show that a buyer knowingly lied on the form, and tested positive for MJ later. One of the acting directors of BATFE not too long ago admitted that he had tried pot when he was younger, and immediately lost his position. They’re not fooling on this one, but at least they’re letting you know..

  • DON WWII vet. November 19, 2016, 5:24 pm

    Smoking Marijuana is worse for you than those filthy cigarettes that the USO gave us free in WW2. If you don’t know that , do some research on WEBMD. I quit cigarettes “cold” in 1963 and believe no one should own a gun if they smoke a controlled substance of any kind. In my 91st year I am probably healthier than most of you and still swim, kayak, bike, hike and work out at the gyms weight room. Legalizing Maryjane on the state level is just as stupid as the mayors of many cities saying they won’t cooperate with Immigration officials and will remain “Sanctuary cities” . We are a REPUBLIC, not a democracy, and our laws should be obeyed by everyone. No exceptions. If you have trouble with being lawful in the USA, please buy a one-way ticket to Mexico or go to Canada with Streisand. I did not risk my neck so people could abuse our rights. With rights ; comes Responsibility. Don (US Naval Aviation WWII)

    • Dan November 19, 2016, 6:46 pm

      My dear old friend. You live in the past. It’s the 21 Century. We now allow women to vote. Blacks are free and the rest of humanity. God is the only one that can say whether we can drink, smoke, eat, and poop whenever we want to. I spent 25 years in the military. I am 65 and I believe that I should be able to partake in anything that God has put on earth. It’s time that people that we vote in stop telling us what we can do or not. And no Sir, I am not moving. If anyone wants to move it’s a free country and they are more welcome to do so.

      • lee November 20, 2016, 5:12 pm

        Jackass

      • Jimmy Hamilton November 22, 2016, 1:45 pm

        I agree with Don. I was around in the 60’s and the 70’second and remember watching people try to do even the smallest of things such as sit down in a seat and be so stoned that it took them 3 or 4 times to sit down .as the old saying goes, they couldn’t hit the ground with their own hat.

        • Jeff November 28, 2016, 4:03 pm

          Well “Jimmy” I’ll have to call BULLSHITE on your “stoner” story. Do I believe you saw people “try to do even the smallest of things such as sit down in a seat and be so stoned that it took them 3 or 4 times to sit down .as the old saying goes, they couldn’t hit the ground with their own hat.” sure I do!! But it sure as hell was not marijuana that caused this behavior.. Alcohol and narcotics causes this type of behavior, and believe me or not, I see this behavior on a weekly basis as a local “Sober Cab” Friday and Saturday nights. We have yet, (after 7 years) to have to pick up a marijuana impaired person. We have, picked up drunks who could not stand, could not sit, walk, talk, follow simple instructions, and have tried to fist fight us and/or police officers, ambulance crew and even a fireman. We recently (last two years or so) have run into a few heroine or narcotic users who do fit your description… Perhaps before you make a blanket statement about marijuana users you should figure out the behavior you are describing does not fit the drug….

    • Danny November 19, 2016, 11:06 pm

      You sir have lived 91 years and are still a fool. Medical marijuana has done wonders for me while going through chemotherapy, it helped me gain my appetite again where all other medications had failed, and furthermore it had no THC which means I was not high just hungry. So since I use this medication my 2nd ammendment rights do not qualify? I will continue to own and shoot my 53 guns for as long as I’m able and continue to take my medication.

      • Mr. ok November 21, 2016, 9:44 am

        Keep on living! You should’ve run for President, you get my VOTE

    • Don November 22, 2016, 3:37 am

      Don:
      You fought for my rights in WW2 and now you say even after my state VOTED to legalize MJ that if I use it I should go to Mexico? I live in Washington State where it is legal and i’m not going any where perhaps if it bothers you so much you should go to Mexico

    • Friar Bacon November 28, 2016, 1:21 am

      Cannabis and hemp are all-American. Prohibition II was nasty, and still wasting and destroying lives as it’s in effect currently.

  • Ronald G. Thomas November 19, 2016, 12:24 pm

    What everyone fails to recognize is that background checks and form 4473 itself are actually infringing on our Second Amendment Rights. When the Second states that “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed”, it doesn’t have any stipulations allowing for “other than”, “except for”, or any “ifs”, or “buts”. Every question on the form 4473 is literally irrelevant since the form shouldn’t exist in the first place!

  • wasntme November 19, 2016, 10:21 am

    Guess it depends on where your at. When a local sheriff in Colorado was asked about it he said it’s the same way as alcohol, as long as you’re not under in the influence, you have no worries.

    Haven’t heard the federal police force was rounding people up yet.

    • Mike Stuhr November 19, 2016, 12:41 pm

      You are in jeopardy anywhere in America from federal officials. Even in Colorado.

  • Robert November 19, 2016, 8:25 am

    Do you actually think someone wouldn’t lie. Give me a break. Sounds to me that our screwed up government is full of it.

  • Arnold Sanders November 18, 2016, 10:48 pm

    We can list all the reasons in the world as to the what, when, where and why on this topic. All the references to this and that doesn’t matter. It all comes down to just one simple fact. Until the feds legalize it, it still illegal on the books. So, either pettition the feds to legalize it, or stop complaining.

  • Robert November 18, 2016, 10:34 pm

    Whar about Washington, D. C. ? It is not state. Does the question apply to those residents? Seems that Federal Laws are “made there”. So maybe it wouldn’t apply…..LOL

  • Wayne Mickel November 18, 2016, 10:16 pm

    When will the prices come down so ordinary people can afford a firearm again I used to buy a Steel CZ75B for 299.00. there is no reason that we the people should be gouged by the gun manufacturers for firearms anymore they go up when we are threatened to lose our rights but that is not a reason to gouge the consumer with ridiculous prices especially when manufacturing them is easier now than a few years ago they are no better than the government on keeping guns out of the reach of the common man.

    • James Evertsen November 19, 2016, 7:46 am

      Factor in the cost of materials and millions for CNC machinery , prices are not really out of line with other industries .

  • Jeff November 18, 2016, 9:39 pm

    Anyone up for a mandatory drug test paid for by the consumer before purchasing a firearm or applying for a concealed pistol license? Seriously folks, smoking pot is dumb. What is even more stupid is to allow narco-terrorists to make billions of dollars around the world and not have a way to regulate, control or tax the vile merchandise. Frankly, I don’t believe that liquor should be advertised on television since booze causes people to rape women and children and commit violent criminal acts.

    • keith November 19, 2016, 11:24 am

      booze doesnt “CAUSE” people to rape women. the mean spirit of the person causes them to do that, and then hide behind the excuse of ” well i was drunk”. and thats bullshit. if he raped a woman, its his evil heart and soul that told him to do that. i drink and have NEVER had the thought of robbing raping or pillaging anyone. there are a lot of responsible drinkers in the world, and out of the millions of people that drink and do happen to own guns, its asinine to sit there and blame booze for the cause of crimes. you are no better than the liberals that blame the mass shootings that occur on the gun manufacturers themselves. its all about responsibility. if i were to drink and drive and cause a horrible wreck that killed someone, would you blame the car manufacturer, the booze, or the person that did it? get real!!

      • Jeff Locke November 23, 2016, 10:38 am

        Well said my friend. Well said. If only more people had that kind of view the country would be in better shape .

    • Dan Smith November 19, 2016, 11:26 am

      Not sure if you are a Troll or actually retarded.

    • Mason November 19, 2016, 12:45 pm

      Jeff your opinion is unwarranted and flawed. “Pot use is dumb”, that’s a dumb thing to say. Tell it to the people who truly use it for medical use and because of that lose their right to defend themselves and their family, but you can have severe anxiety with a zanax prescription or a painkiller prescription and that’s just fine. You’re an idiot

    • Danny November 19, 2016, 11:09 pm

      Wow jeff you are a moron! It makes me sad that I have to call you a fellow gun owner. You better pray they dont start making you take a common sense test or you will never purchase another firearm.

    • Jeff November 21, 2016, 3:49 pm

      Apparently some people didn’t read my entire post and recognize the satire I was attempting and my position for legalizing and taxing cannabis. I have no desire to partake, but I don’t want to pay any more tax dollars locking up people for smoking grass. Smoking pot is in fact ‘dumb’ since it can be consumed orally in complete safety. Carbon monoxide isn’t good for anyone.

  • James Mathis November 18, 2016, 9:22 pm

    You mean to tell me that I can’t load up my firearms, get stoned and go shoot up the countryside? I’ve been doing that for decades. Nothing like a smoking bong and a smoking AR-10. Love that 30 round clip in .308. More fun than a barrel of monkeys. So now, I sit on my porch with my SKS, a bong, a case of ammo and a baggy of weed waiting for the social order to break down so I can start shooting what I really want to shoot. ZOMBIES! Now, I’ ve passed up Greys and Lizard people, and the effort to restrain myself was unbearably agonizing. Then I passed up that whole family of Sasquatches…. I mean, what if I’d have bagged a Bigfoot, but I was too mellow to want to hurt the furry big guys. Last time I went deer hunting stoned I bagged a 4 point pink buck with purple spots while he was concentrating on his PDA. Almost got a shot at a herd of schmoos, too but they offered me some of theirs. Killerrrrr……

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 21, 2016, 10:24 am

      Wow, Dude! Your compound a couple old base camps I used to hang out at back in the mean green jungle days!
      One tip, don’t let any monkeys play with the grenades, especially when they’re stoned.

    • Mark November 23, 2016, 6:03 am

      Somebody hand that man a cigar. This is the real issue along with narrow mind views on issues that should be ones own personal choice and No One Else’s. We all have to go before our creator in the end and along with his Son, they will judge us. Not anybody else. JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED! Oh and the pothead’s reply was priceless. I love you man.

  • Kevin November 18, 2016, 7:30 pm

    How come California will have to regard the federal stance on marijuana, but not the federal stance on gun laws? This makes no sense to me. I’m all for drug addicts not being able to purchase firearms, but if you are prescribed vicodin, oxycontin, valium, xanax, or… marijuana in California it’s not illegal and what is the problem if a doctor is controlling your intake?

    • LJ November 18, 2016, 10:38 pm

      I believe it’s spelled ‘Kalifornia’ …

      • keith November 19, 2016, 11:24 am

        its actually Commifornia

    • Jarrod November 19, 2016, 2:05 am

      The problem with marijuana used medically in California is that it is a doctor’s recommendation, not prescription. The doctor signs a paper saying he recommends marijuana be used to treat whatever condition described on the recommendation paper. The user/patient then goes to a despensary and buys whatever quantity and whatever potency he wants and consumes it at whatever rate he wants to. I bet every time you’ve ever been prescribed a medication, the doctor outlines exactly how many pills in the bottle, how strong the pills, how many per day, however many hours apart, etc… And then a follow up appointment to analyze the medication’s potency. Or something along those lines. That doesn’t happen in California with medical marijuana. They get a recommendation so they can buy it from a dispensary rather than from some shady dude in a parking lot. So it’s really now prescribed, it’s recommended.

      As for California not abiding by federal gun laws, that’s a whole other problem…

    • Steve November 19, 2016, 2:31 am

      No one in California has a perscription for marijuana. Some have a mere “recommendation” but no one has an RX for it.

      • bob November 21, 2016, 6:07 pm

        Sorry Steve but there is a prescription for marijuana in Calif…it’s named Marinol and comes in pill form, has been in use since the mid ninty’s that I know of and still available by prescription. Expensive stuff at around 25-30 dollars a 10mg pill. Way cheaper to grow your own to treat nausea of chemotherapy. I prescribed the stuff when I practiced medicine in Calif. Of course my awakening occurred in 2000 when the light bulb went off and I got the hell out of California. Sure like to see Trump lead the good people to take that state back.

    • Bill Fairfax November 19, 2016, 8:29 am

      If your prescribed a medicine by a Dr it’s usually approved by the FDA which would make it legal for the Dr to prescribe. Marijuana on the other hand hasn’t been approved by the FDA for medical use which is why it’s a schedule 1 drug and why it’s a Federal crime to posses it for any purpose . All the other drugs you mentioned are only illegal if you don’t have a Dr’s prescription for there use . I think the problem here is the ATF should be able to use the database for Medical Marijuana users in the states where they’ve legalized weed to find people in violation of gun laws and to keep people on those lists from buying guns.
      There ready made lists they don’t even have to work hard for the extra info.

  • Dj November 18, 2016, 7:20 pm

    Wow, I’M 62. Ex Military, I was Customs Officer, Port Everglades Miami, Held other Security Positions. I have smoked Mj on/off 45yrs. And it is not Addictive, Or mind Altering. Or turn you into a criminal or a worthless person. I have held a Federal Dealers License for yrs. I have a C.W.P. since I got out of the service. I am a retired Roofer Framer of 20 yrs. Also built and Raced Bikes and Cars for ever. I own my Home free and clear, Just sold a 10 Acre ranch. Have a brand new TRD Tacoma, Street Glide, And just Purchased a 2016 Z06 3Lt Corvette. All Pd For. So Let’s See, Oh Ya I’m A Worthless Burn out.

    • Steve November 19, 2016, 2:34 am

      See, all that pot has got you rambling about unrelated misc stuff. Try to stay on topic. Lol

    • serio November 19, 2016, 3:03 am

      You tell a great story, partner. Fact of the matter is, violating the law is violating the law. If I catch you, I’m going to bust you and you can tell it to the Judge. I look forward to meeting you one day. Remember, if you give me probably cause, all subsequent discovery is admissible. FYI, I like to take shadetree lawyers down a peg, depending. If you enjoy all the fruits of your labor, don’t get tied up with messy court costs and attorney fees. I’ll keep my eye out for you.

      • Jay November 19, 2016, 6:26 am

        Another champion fighting the war on drugs that is a failure. You poor fool. Start a war on Alcohol because it kills and ruins lives every day. Drunk drivers, domestic abuse and murder, rape and many other evils. I’ll bet you’re not above enforcing your brand of justice using probable cause as an excuse to go on a fishing expedition (and enjoying it) from the way you threatened Dj. By the way I don’t use the stuff but I’ve been around users for long enough to know it is not the evil you want it to be. No one dies from a mj OD or goes out of their mind like an alcoholic and kills someone .You re the kind of cop who uses every traffic stop as an excuse for Probable Cause to look for a way to make an arrest.

        • Tommy November 23, 2016, 12:56 am

          Thanks Jay! Finally found someone who shares my views. I’ve shot guns when I was high on MJ and I’ve shot drunk. I can tell you from experience that shooting after drinking left me amazed that no of us were killed. Any person who uses alcohol is 100 times more dangerous than a person who who smoked. Stumbling bumbling users of alcohol are hands down the most dangerous gun owners there are. And I grew up in a small town where there was more than one business that sold alcohol, fire arms and ammo!

      • wasntme November 19, 2016, 10:32 am

        Not that hard. I didn’t lie on the form, I bought those guns before I started smoking. PROVE me wrong. Should spend your time looking out for heroin and meth traffickers, assuming you really are a cop, They are truly destroying our country. I image they are much more dangerous to deal with though.

    • Jarrod November 19, 2016, 12:10 pm

      Good for you, DJ. I’m sure you’ve seen MJ have an completely opposite impact on the lives of others. Goes to show you that every persons body and chemical make up is different. I’m happy you’ve had such success with your life.

  • Bob November 18, 2016, 7:16 pm

    I hope there are a bunch of former ATF agents looking for jobs in the next few years.

    • Mark November 23, 2016, 6:13 am

      No one will hire them in the real world because it calls in their ability to make rational decisions. They already have a track record of that when they joined. Wait, I’m sorry, someone will, just not where that ability is viewed as non-critical.

  • Steve Smith November 18, 2016, 4:18 pm

    Is an illegal alien ask such questions as this to come into the U.S.A

  • drfrankenklein November 18, 2016, 3:22 pm

    I am very glad they are standing fast on to this law. Marijuana is an addictive illegal drug and should be outlawed. Hopefully The new regime takes a handle on this law strongly. You have a prescription for this crap you are dying anyway and do not need a firearm nor should you be able to own one as marijuana does destroy your brain and is a proven fact. If you are smoking it illegally you do not deserve to own a firearm and are breaking the Federal laws of the United States of America thus deserve your punishment for breaking the law in two or three categories. Ever been in combat and seen the effects of what marijuana can do to a platoon or a impaired soldier on this drug? A jungle fighter that smoked pot most likely died due to impaired judgement. I know this for a fact as a combat soldier. Take that dirty filthy peace loving, free loving hippy Pot shit to the grave with you. Not on my watch! When the stuff burns it smells of a defeatist liberal Left Winger to me. I can confidently and gladly conform to the proper Federal laws in owning a firearm and to be at the ready when needed, not laying down to a death sentence high on marijuana.

    • RICK November 18, 2016, 5:46 pm

      sound’s like alcohol should be on the list!

    • Gary L Moore November 18, 2016, 6:24 pm

      You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

    • PaulWVa November 18, 2016, 6:51 pm

      Dr. Wackoklien here shows that there are over-the-top, extremist wackos on both sides of every argument. The misinformation and lies spewed by this clown are just as bad as the anti-gunners and their rhetoric. How out of touch with reality can one person be?

    • Joe McHugh November 18, 2016, 8:19 pm

      drfrankenKlein, I suggest that you look at the bigger picture here. What gives the government the right to abuse your Fifth Amendment right, i.e. the right to refuse to incriminate yourself in ANY way, in order to deny you your Second Amendment right to arms?
      Don’t get me wrong, I am not a proponent of using mind altering drugs. However, there are only two conditions that should
      be checked before a person can purchase a firearm. 1) that the prospective buyer is not a violent criminal. 2) that the prospective buyer has not been adjudged as being a psychotic who is a danger to others or himself. ALL other regulations and restrictions used to deny a competent, law-abiding adult citizen from buying a firearm are infringements that are completely unconstitutional. “Competent” and “law-abiding” means that the government has no record that a citizen is not a righteous citizen.

      Let’s face it, the anti-gun liberals dream up ever more ways to abuse the people’s right to arms at the Federal level, (form #4473), or the state level. By the way, what gives the various states the right to abuse your Second Amendment rights if such abuse is deemed unacceptable at the Federal level? Is it really OK for the various state legislation bodies to act as mini tyrannies?

      Form #4473 records EVERYTHING about you and the firearm you wish to purchase. Question: Why is the government keenly interested in the serial number of your rifle? Crime fighting? Don’t make me laugh! What criminal worries about Federal forms, and N.I.C.S. checks when he is planning to rob a bank with his stolen handgun? If you think that laws prevent crime, there is no hope for you. Even released felons go on to break the very same laws that they went to prison for violating in the first place.

      Pssst! These is only one reason that the government wants to know the serial number, brand and model number of your firearm, namely to enable gun confiscation in the future. There is no other credible reason for the government to record the details of the gun that you might own.

      This is the thing, the authorities should verify that a prospective gun buyer is not a violent criminal, or has not been adjudged to be a danger to others or himself. However, the authorities have no reason to record anything else about you or the firearm you want to buy. One way to keep the government honest is to keep it ignorant about what firearms that you might own.
      Most politicians fear an armed populace because it has a means to maintain its independence from a government that might abuse the people’s rights. Yup, it’s just that simple.

      • keith November 19, 2016, 11:29 am

        well said!

    • thomas michelsen November 18, 2016, 10:49 pm

      !!!!SALE STARTING AT @ 12:00 AM EST. SAVE ON IN STOCK 60 AND 100 ROUND MAGS!!!! !!!!!!!ONE OUT OF THE FIRST 20 CUSTOMERS WILL WIN A FREE 100 ROUND MAG!!!!!!!!
      !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLUS SAVE BIG AT CHECKOUT USE PROMO CODE “black100”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • marineone November 18, 2016, 11:31 pm

      Ddrfrankenklien,You have been in way to much combat my friend and you don’t need a firearm in your hand your dangerous to anyone you are around. I wonder about people like you I myself am a combat veteran myself but not burned out as you.You need help BAD.,Bet you drink like a fish?

    • Jim November 19, 2016, 5:45 am

      drfrankenklein –
      Before you run your uninformed mouth about medical marijuana please do some research on it. You don’t have to be dying to use it for pain and a number of other real medical problems. There is a day and night difference between smoking for a sustained high and using it medically. And do you know that medical marijuana is CBD not THC? But even so THC also is used with much success for pain that prescription drugs don’t give the same relief. Further more all the pain drugs are Class 1 Drugs that every day cause death one way or another. No one has ever died of a Marijuana OD. It should be reclassified as a Class 3 drug even as alcohol should be classified as a Class 3 Drug. But that will never happen because it brings in a ton of tax revenue. Alcohol abuse is a killer, literally. How many deadly auto accidents does it cause every day yet you can stop at the convenient store which are part of the modern gas station complex and buy beer, wine and vodka. At least in Ohio.
      You experienced Vietnam with young men that were not fighting a war to protect their country but were fighting to stay alive. and were escaping from the reality of the hell they were in with the marijuana. If they had had access to enough alcohol they would have used that to blur their mental fear and pain.
      Am I an old Hippie pot smoking Liberal?
      Hell No!! I’m 73years old, a proud Navy Veteran, served in Nam and I voted for Trump and I’m proud to say I am a conservative Independent thinker and voter.
      My stand on legalization?
      Medical, Yes.
      Recreational, Absolutely Not!
      Check out the real facts on medical marijuana on Google
      https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=thc+vs+cbd
      https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=medical+use+of+cannabis

      • drfrankenklein November 20, 2016, 1:16 pm

        I agree medicinal in great for the ill on their way out that are in need of something they assume will relive their pain. I will not bow to that level as I stand fast on my witness of what the effects are of the narcotic marijuana . No matter what, It is your choice and I respect this I have no say so. But if you are on medicinal marijuana {a medicinal narcotic} you should not own a firearm or be in possession of one and this should be closely monitored so firearms are not around people that are high and for that matter drunk or any other judgment impairing drugs. I see people that are abusing the system with the prescriptions prescribed by quack doctors.

    • Joe November 19, 2016, 5:12 pm

      I have never used mj, but knew some people that used it. I do support it for people that have strong medical conditions. The same as for other topics, I first get informed about and issue before talking. You seem to just talk out of your ass without proof. MJ does not cause addiction, this have been scientifically proven. MJ does not destroy the brain. This also have been proven with MRI studies and it actually can HEAL the brain and have cured BRAIN CANCER. Your stupidity goes beyond anything when you say that if they have a prescription for this they are dying anyway. WHO GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO SAY WHO NEEDS WHAT OR IF YOU ARE GOING TO DIE OR NOT? There is so much ignorance in your post that you are either a troll or need a mental evaluation ASAP. Some people have conditions like ephilepsy, which is helped by MJ and they are not dying you moron. Your right to bear arms should not be inflicted by ANYTHING. What is funny is that retards like you to claim to be veterans are prescribed worst things like Vicodin, zoloft and all kind of shit that WILL fuck your brain, your liver, and have the secondary effects listed, and stil, as long as is not prescribed by a psychiatrist , you dont have to say it on the form. And by the way you tool, there is no prescription for MJ. It can not be prescribed because the FDA can not make a patent for a natural product. That is why big pharma have give BILLIONS to the federal goverment to keep it on the class 1 medication list. If you would have brain and wont be a programmed by the goverment robot , then you would know how this world works and why MJ have been banned. It is not only because is a drug. It is a plant that can replace cotton for textile ( and the cotton industry paid millions also to make mj illegal), it have a high concentration of protein, it needs low quantities of water and it is not invasive to other plants so we could be making clothes cheaply and using the protein (which is legally sold as hemp powder)without using a lot of land or water or affecting other species, It kills cancer cells and regulates some ephilepsy patients. I used to believe all the crap people like you talks , until I sat down and LEARNED THE FACTS. I suggest that before you talk any more nonsense you sit down and do the same.

    • Chuck Roast November 19, 2016, 8:39 pm

      Think some folks are missing the major point. The Feds don’t give a darn if you have smoked pot. If the folks running “…the Government” cared one scintilla for you, your safety, or your quality of life, they would have secured the God Damned borders and refrained from shipping our livelihoods off to foreign nations..
      What this particular “…Government” is interested in, is confiscating guns from peaceable citizens so they can (even more so than they currently do so now) remove actual Freedom from our grasp. Freedom is not simply being “allowed” to exist if we submit to an array of ever changing list of conditions. It is being allowed to exist/live without unwarranted, unauthorized, illogical interference with the our exercise of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

    • Danny November 19, 2016, 11:17 pm

      Lol the so called dr must have lost his wife to a hippie. You sir are a joke.

      • drfrankenklein November 20, 2016, 1:21 pm

        Been married 40 years now and pothead free. Keep smoking away I may eventually own your weapons & ammo you can keep your boyfriend..

    • Robert November 26, 2016, 6:21 pm

      I can’t believe that you would insult all the men and women who died in Viet Nam, how dare you say that they were high due to marijuana. I know you have never been in a combat situation, or you would not be so stupid. In Viet Nam the young boys who were drafted and given a weapon to kill, needed some sort of relief, marijuana was that relief for many of the boys. Seeing their friends killed and wounded was a situation that I would not wish on my worst enemy not even a moron liberal like you. I have talked to many vets from that war and even now it is hard for them to talk about it, however we do discuss the fact that we all smoked then and now. Drink you a beer and a bottle of booze and shut the Hell up!!!!! You are a liar to pretend you ever saw combat.

    • fred November 26, 2016, 7:01 pm

      Iwould like to know if you have a green card

  • Edward November 18, 2016, 2:54 pm

    The Federales continue to adhere to the stupid side of the highway rather than choosing the ignorant side, which is, as we all know, correctable.The total lack of common sense when dealing with issues concerning cannabis is beyond belief. The new head of the DEA has stated in open forums his perception of marijuana, which is antipathetic to the entire medical community and myriad numbers of potheads (pass me those Cheetos, please) and I, for one can attest to the fact that reefer is harmless because, after smokong it for 52 years, I have suffered no negative results whereas alcohol and tobacco have posed a danger to my health and to the health of those around me in the form of second-hand smoke. For the love of all that’s important please address the problems that are rife in this country and stop trying to “fix” that which is not broken.

    • John November 18, 2016, 4:01 pm

      Is just another way to criminalize the gun owner to a federal crime from a misdemeanor. Pretty soon they( atf) will do the same with ammunition. This bill was brought on by Hillary Clinton . Who also says that anybody who is on Daily depression medicine can’t own a firearm either, thank God she was not the Elected. But it looks like the ATF will carry on her plans, that’s our government. arm everybody and then take them away. I say Texas should succeed from the union.

  • Hank Noway November 18, 2016, 2:51 pm

    This form 4473 does not have a valid OMB number. Look at the “Paper Work Reduction Act” it says “(XII Sec. 3512. Public protection
    1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that is subject to this chapter if–
    i. the collection of information does not display a valid control number assigned by the Director in accordance with this chapter; or
    ii. the agency fails to inform the person who is to respond to the collection of information that such person is not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a valid control number.
    B. The protection provided by this section may be raised in the form of a complete defense, bar, or otherwise at any time during the agency administrative process or judicial action applicable thereto.)”

    • ShutYoMouth! November 19, 2016, 12:02 pm

      SSSsssssshhhhhhhh!!!!!

  • steve November 18, 2016, 2:02 pm

    so, I’m confused. is their only problem with it the fact that it is (federally) illegal? because they seem to have no problem with people who use alcohol, or are prescribed opiates, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, antihistamines, and other psychoactive drugs that are schedule 2 or below.

    • BigBlockTank November 18, 2016, 2:47 pm

      Alcohol is legal to buy nationwide.

    • Tony November 19, 2016, 7:57 am

      I promise you, alcohol has caused far more damage to people and property than pot ever will, if you don’t believe me, just check the stats.

  • Soont McPoont November 18, 2016, 1:58 pm

    if reefer was good enough for Nam Vets, than it’s good enough for me!

    • Vieteran November 18, 2016, 2:49 pm

      Then, no guns for you. As a Virtnam veteran myself, I can tell you not all of us are drug addled or alcoholics, and anyone who smoked weed or used drugs in the field was not only endangering themselves but everyone around them. You learned right away to distance yourself from those guys in combat. It’s hard enough to protect your own 6 in that situation let alone haul an intoxicated/high doper around with you.

      • oldwestman November 18, 2016, 3:34 pm

        Amen to that Vet. The last hing you need is some drug addled idiot drawing fire because he’s to stoned to walk softly. Firearms and drugs and alcohol do not mix well at all, this is an accident waiting to happen period end of report.

      • Danny November 19, 2016, 11:20 pm

        Wrong sir I can still go to a gun show or person to person sale. Protect your 6, you mean when your hiding in the latrine

      • drfrankenklein November 20, 2016, 1:33 pm

        You’re are correct i never depended on these marijuana pothead smoking slackers as we advanced. Would just hope they would space out and catch one. That was not uncommon at all though as they lost their sense of discipline. Only problem was you had to use another body bag and call in a chopper to haul his ass out giving away an advanced position.

  • jake November 18, 2016, 1:45 pm

    The departments responsible for the background checks have only 3 working days to find something to deny USA citizens their inalienable right to purchase a firearm.
    That includes states with additional “POC” statutes.
    After those 3 days the applicant for all practical purposes “wins” by default.
    The confiscation of the firearm after the default period is rare in cases where a post default period denial is generated for whatever reason.
    They are very busy, and 3 days is barely enough time to vett for misdemeanors & felonies of applicants that check those question boxes “No”; let alone the questions pertaining to drugs, alcohol, mental health, and addiction that have the “No” box checked.
    Perjury convictions for falsifying those answers on forms like those are next to kneel mainly because the burden of proof is a very lofty bar.
    At the moment the forms are merely a detrimental process facilitating the record keeping compliance of existing codes & statutes; but that’s it.

    • Joe McHugh November 20, 2016, 3:13 pm

      Jake, I disagree. ANY information that a citizen is required to divulge against himself to qualify for purchasing a firearm is a violation against his Second Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights. Assurance that the customer is not a violent felon or an adjudged psychotic who is a danger to others or himself is all that the government needs to know, and that information should already be in the data banks of the N.I.C.S. Center. If a citizen lacks any such record, he or she has the constitutional right to buy a firearm, any firearm. Any other information only helps the government to know what guns you may own. Keeping the government ignorant of the firearms that the people might posses is a good way to keep the government honest.

      Somewhere along the line, the idea that the government has to check up on the people in order to trust them with gun ownership, replaced the idea that the elected representatives should demonstrate that they are worthy of the people’s trust themselves.

      Question: What possible benefit does the government gain by recording the serial number on a citizen’s firearm? I’m not being facetious in asking this question, I really want someone, …anyone to answer it. Forget about the “wording” on the Federal form no. 4473, that form is an outright infringement against a person’s right to keep and bear arms. The gun dealer’s phone call to the N.I.C.S. Center is all the control that the government should be allowed.

      Three days to check the history of an identified citizen? Computers have long since enabled a bureaucrat the ability to verify the history of a citizen. An agent using a workstation should not take any longer than a few minutes to retrieve such information from the data bank in a computer server. Ten minutes should be the maximum time limit for the government to delay a firearm purchase. You know, what the politicians said about the N.I.C.S. program when they first initiated it, “instant background checks”. The burden falls on the government to make such background checks in a reasonable amount of time.

      Computer down time? What a lame excuse! The government certainly has the money to install redundant backup computer systems, just like the ones that the large corporations rely on.

      There is no credible reason that a citizen should be delayed in buying a gun if the government can’t show that he or she is not a violent felon or a psychotic who is dangerous to others or himself. Such information is either there, or it is not there. The benefit of the doubt must always be afforded to those citizens who identify themselves, and who wish to buy a firearm.

      But hey, I’m just a guy who thinks that the people control the government, not vice versa.

      • Pete November 20, 2016, 10:23 pm

        Joe, I like the way you think. Some people may not know that the 1970’s Controlled Substances Act, which establishes the schedules for marijuana and other drugs, is predicated on the Wickard vs Filburn case (US Supreme Court, 1942) which greatly expanded the power of the federal government through a very, very broad interpretation of the “interstate commerce” clause. Before Wickard vs Filburn, this type of restriction would have required an amendment (consider the 18th Amendment, for example, passed just 23 years before the Filburn decision). All powers not enumerated in the Constitution should be reserved for the States… and this is really an issue of States rights. If the people of a State decide marijuana should be legal in that State, then no federal agency should have the authority to overrule them without an amendment to the Constitution. And if an activity is legally sanctioned by the State in which they reside, there is no reason it should preclude them from exercising Constitutional rights. I wonder why this is not plainly obvious to otherwise very Constitutionally-minded people.

        • Joe Mchugh November 21, 2016, 9:24 am

          Pete, exactly right! The Constitution of the United States limits what the Federal Government can do to the people. Likewise, the various states have their own constitutions or charters that limit what they can do to the residents of those states.

          The main problem is the same one that has existed since mankind organized governments for its societies. That problem is the tendency of ALL governments to become tyrannies, if they were initially designed to be democratic in nature. Our representative republic started out with a great advantage, namely the Constitution. The principles and laws inscribed into the Constitution originally provided the means to guide our society while recognizing the inherent rights of the individual citizen.

          Over the years, especially the last 1/2 century, the Federal Government has become ever more authoritarian in nature.
          Our “trusted” representatives now give the Constitution a wink and a nod when they craft new legislation. As you noted, these “leaders” use the “Interstate Commerce Clause” and the “Necessary and Proper Clause” to justify Federal legislation that is often abusive to the people’s rights as affirmed in the Bill of Rights.

          The politicians in Washington, D.C. also act as though the 14th Amendment did not exist. CONTROL is the element that these elite seek, always more control over our lives. The state legislators are just as complicit in this reprehensible behavior. The West Coast states and the North East states are pluperfect examples of this move towards tyranny. Some of the Mid Atlantic states are becoming just as authoritarian. Illinois stands out like as sore thumb because the liberal city of Chicago dominates that state.

          And now the blame game. The majority of the voters are to blame because they elect the candidates who promise bigger and bigger government. These voters have forgotten what their mothers told them, “Nothing is free in life, you have to work for whatever you want.”

          America is now in decline and we are all on a train headed for a liberal Utopia called Perdition. Donald Trump may negotiate with the Congress to turn this ship of state around, but that is a long shot. The people need to understand what socialism always causes, i.e. decay in the societies that try to use this false political theory.

          The race is on. It’s the race to witness which will come first, a Utopia that holds all of the people in a condition of common misery, or a failed dollar that will bring about the chaos of economic collapse. I personally believe that the resulting economic collapse will start food and energy riots, with a great upheaval to follow. What can I say, we seem bound and determined to relearn the intractable law, namely freedom is never free.

  • Bob Black November 18, 2016, 1:35 pm

    Why even bother adding that shit. Unless they plan on piss testing everyone it means nothing. Because I’m sure that eveyone who has filled out the form and smokes weed has admitted to it… I will sleep better knowing that the ATF is on top of this problem… Tards!

    • Gary L Moore November 18, 2016, 6:26 pm

      Exactly Right!

    • thomas michelsen November 18, 2016, 10:50 pm

      !!!!SALE STARTING AT @ 12:00 AM EST. SAVE ON IN STOCK 60 AND 100 ROUND MAGS!!!! !!!!!!!ONE OUT OF THE FIRST 20 CUSTOMERS WILL WIN A FREE 100 ROUND MAG!!!!!!!!
      !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLUS SAVE BIG AT CHECKOUT USE PROMO CODE “black100”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • keith November 19, 2016, 11:37 am

      LMAO!! yeah let me be honest….i dont smoke weed, now to answer the next question… like someone that does smoke it is going to tell the truth KNOWING their isnt any kind of piss test to prove it. its just like the question on the form that asks ” are you a fugitive from justice?” it makes me laugh everytime i have to fill out the form. because if i was, i would answer that truthfully. if you get down to the real questions on there and remove the stupid ones, there are only about 8-10 real questions on that form that the government really needs answers to.

  • Chasrlie November 18, 2016, 12:11 pm

    It takes only one time when a MJ FREAK goes mad because his brain has been altered by his substance abuse to kill you. No going back. You are dead! Take that FINAL chance.I do not think so!

    • Henry Bowman November 18, 2016, 12:15 pm

      Aren’t you a special kind of stupid..

      • Campbell A King November 18, 2016, 1:48 pm

        You got that mixed up with liquor Chasrlie !

    • neil November 18, 2016, 1:00 pm

      I am NOT a marajuana user nor do I drink alcohol, coffee, take big pharm.’s poison pills or smoke tobacco but D.C. is corrupt. 10th amendment … the district of criminals are off their reservation!!! The 10th amendment says that they do NOT have the authorization to do this! This may not be your fight but Washington D.C. is out to control EVERYTHING you do!!!

      • Don November 18, 2016, 2:37 pm

        Neil, sorry, you are incorrect. The Feds ABSOLUTELY have the right to do this. The feds are in control of drugs through the FDA. That gives then the right to say what we can and can not put into our bodies. And, obviously, the 2nd Amendment, being part of the founding constitution, the protections awarded by the second amendment is obviously Federal. The Federal government is charged with the responsibility to not “infringe” upon our rights to keep and bear arms. They cannot “infringe” upon any law abiding citizen who wishes to buy and or “bear arms”. If someone is a user of compounds that may inhibit their judgement, the feds not only have the right to prohibit that, they have an obligation. Any person who is law abiding, not under any order of protection, not adjudicated a “crazy” should be able to buy a firearm. But, if a person is impaired, by using illegal substances, with can have an effect on his judgement or response, should NEVER put their hands on a firearm. And anyone who thinks that mary jane does not impair you, has smoked too much of the stuff and cannot come to a legitimate conclusion I am a gun owner, a member of the NRA, believe in the 2nd amendment right to bear arms, and I completely support this change! The ONLY thing they are saying, is that if you use a prohibit (prohibited by the feds) compound, you can’t buy a gun. Decisions have consequences. If you decide to smoke weed, you give up your right to a gun! You get to choose!

        • drfrankenklein November 18, 2016, 3:31 pm

          No choice on that one, use your head and stay vigilant. Ask any combat soldier that that has seen what Hippy Left wing poison can do to you.

        • riley November 18, 2016, 3:46 pm

          The government doesn’t have rights. The government only has authority.
          Right come from God by birth. Authority is given to government by the people. The people did not give this authority to the feds. It’s in the constitution 10th A

          • Bob November 18, 2016, 6:33 pm

            Dream on. At one time in our history, this was true. However, due to years of inaction, many NOT voting, & career politicians, we, The People have abdicated our authority! Many people finally stopped overdosing on “dumb pills” to save this last election from the Socialists, but, look what our schools are turning out! Parents are no longer involved with rearing their children, they let the streets & schools do it! It will take a MAJOR change in our population to stand up on their hind legs & continue to say “Enough”! It causes me to loose a lot of sleep, but I just don’t see a majority of our population having the will or guts to reclaim our rights as guaranteed by the Constitution & the amendments thereto!

          • Dean November 18, 2016, 8:17 pm

            Amen Riley, that’s a fact. That the avalanche of alphabet government agencies even exist is a shame and a sham! These agencies exist solely to skirt the U.S. Constitution, with un-elected bureaucrats making law! I don’t think the Feds own judges will ever find the Fed inferior to the States, although they sure are, and the laws they make to say otherwise are total BS. The union was formed by sovereign States with the right to leave at anytime intact. Lincoln of course felt otherwise and the rest is history.

        • Dan Smith November 19, 2016, 11:39 am

          Wrong. In this country you are INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. Therefore no criminal act unproven can be used against you to bar you from your constitutional rights. The 5th amendment protects us from having to incriminating ourselves so making an incriminatory statement mandatory to exercise a write is strictly prohibited. Should the police also shut down any attempt at protesting the legalization of MJ since they are criminals they shouldn’t have the right to free speech either.

    • Edward November 18, 2016, 2:57 pm

      WTF have YOU been smoking?

    • jack November 18, 2016, 3:19 pm

      “MJ FREAK” Gotta love those who still remain in the uninformed or uneducated bubbles. Have not heard that term since the 60s when the marijuana being passed in the form of a joint had been laced with another drug. If this writer would take the time which I know he won’t he would learn that Marijuana is less harmful than about every known drug out there and on top of it is NOT addictive according to the AMA.
      Wake up Chasrlie and learn about something before you speak.

      • Vieteran November 18, 2016, 6:19 pm

        Smoking marijuana over a long period of time does have detrimental effects on the trachea, bronchi and lungs down to the alveoli level. This is documented medical fact, so it does have bad effects on health.

        I have a buddy who is an opioid prescribed vet, he never gets buzzed from it because the medication the VA gives him is MS Contin which is time released morphine. There are a lot of people who take this medication for chronic pain due to illness and injury as well as degenerative diseases of the bone and joints, and because of the time release property of the drug it simply does not produce an intoxication effect. Much misinformation and misconception is out in the public about opioids, but if taken as directed they pose little to no risk of impaired mental acuity or physical capability. Such is NOT the case with people who abuse prescription pain medications, mostly because they exceed the prescription dose in order to get “buzzed”, which is really a poor term to describe opiate intoxication since this class of narcotics are central nervous system depressants and have no stimulant or psychoactive effects.

        I was a combat medic, and worked at Walter Reed Army Hospital, and I had access to one of the best medical libraries in the world at that time. I remember all the barracks talk about how harmless pot smoking was, and saw plenty of evidence that stories like those had no basis in reality. I had to call dustoff more than a few times for those soldiers who partook of pot in the field and some paid for it in rather traumatic ways because they were stoned out in the AO and the enemy tried to ruin everyone’s day.

        Please do not tell me that pot is harmless – I know different.

    • Gary L Moore November 18, 2016, 6:31 pm

      There appears to be a lot of talk from people who know nothing about the subject. Illegal or not, getting stoned and messing with a gun (stupid) is no different than getting drunk and messing with a gun (stupid).
      Stupid people are everywhere and stupid is the problem, not the weed.

  • Dan November 18, 2016, 11:12 am

    “…marijuana, depressant, stimulant, etc” Well that is the majority of America. Did the ATF forget caffeine is a stimulant or that millions of people are on anti-depressants? Shit sugar is a depressant and causes mood alteration!

    • Judi November 18, 2016, 12:44 pm

      But that’s prefaced by “Are you an UNLAWFUL user of…”

      So, I’m guessing that people who have legitimate prescriptions for anti-depressants or other controlled drugs won’t be affected. But that’s just a guess. Soooooo…. if you want more guns, best to buy them before the 16th of Jan!

    • Vieteran November 18, 2016, 2:54 pm

      So far we have no case history of a mega glucose loaded miscreant wreaking havoc and committing multiple homicides by firearms. Please restrict your hyperbole to known and reasonable examples – hyperbole only makes you look foaming at the mouth mad.

      • Matt Jones November 18, 2016, 3:50 pm

        Since madmen and women who kill people singly or in groups are not tested for a lot of things that are legal there is no way to tell that a killer drank a lot caffeine or ate 4 dozen donuts or 4 pounds of chocolate before murdering people. You are assuming fact where there is none. : )

        • Vieteran November 18, 2016, 7:11 pm

          Matt, on the contrary, the one making assumptions is the commenter that said, “Shit sugar is a depressant and causes mood alteration!”.

          I merely responded with a sensible assessment of that remark. We can debate that all day long, but the truth is it is all speculation and conjecture unless as you say we start blood testing all these killers for everything under the sun. There is no causal relationship for insane killers and substances such as sugar or caffeine. I have personally drank a pot of coffee working night shift for years when I was working those hours and I never went into a homicidal raged or even harmed, much less verbally attacked anyone else.

      • Gary L Moore November 18, 2016, 6:34 pm

        If a guy is determined to kill people, he is going to kill people. The weed is not going to add to the desire. Although it may make him eat potato chips instead.

        • thomas michelsen November 18, 2016, 10:51 pm

          !!!!SALE STARTING AT @ 12:00 AM EST. SAVE ON IN STOCK 60 AND 100 ROUND MAGS!!!! !!!!!!!ONE OUT OF THE FIRST 20 CUSTOMERS WILL WIN A FREE 100 ROUND MAG!!!!!!!!
          !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLUS SAVE BIG AT CHECKOUT USE PROMO CODE “black100”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • Rangemaster11 November 18, 2016, 9:41 pm

        I rebut with the “Twinkie Defense”. Granted it was contrived…

  • Rocky November 18, 2016, 11:12 am

    Not sure why they’re getting all excited about pot heads owning guns, when is the last time you saw a pot head get high and say, “Hey man… Let’s go grab a bunch of guns and go shoot up the wally world parking lot!”

    You haven’t!!

    They all say, “Hey man… You got any chips? Awww dude… What about peanut butter and jelly? Yeah man, like… your gun is cool and all; can I eat it? Dude, I’m goin to mickey-D’s. I gotta find something to eat, that throw pillow on the sofa is startin to look like a big Oreo!”

    The revisions to the form are unwarranted, and a waste of tax dollars. Some needs to go over the form with a microscope, I’m sure somewhere on there the Obama Administration has entered a microscopic line that says you surrender all gun rights if you’re white and not a felon.

    • Michael W November 18, 2016, 2:35 pm

      This is funny!! Either you hang out w a lot of pot heads or speaking from experience, either way, it’s funny as shxx. I’m rolling in laughter at the office n everyone is giving me funny looks….
      I agree w you 110%

    • Edward November 18, 2016, 2:59 pm

      Waste tax dollars?? When have you EVER known the Feds to waste tax dollars? Huh? When?

  • Steve November 18, 2016, 10:15 am

    RE: Medical MJ – someone made a good point….
    Medical MJ is not legal in my state.
    While being treated with chemo for terminal cancers, my parents were prescribed a drug, “Marinol” a synthetic cannabis, that stimulated appetite and according to both of them, really got them high, Mind you this was at two different times, 1998 and 2016, so the technology of the drug was not much different. I have heard some say it doesn’t get you high, but they said and acted as if it did. So since that drug was a synthetic version of THC and prescribed by a doctor it makes a difference – how? Neither of them would have been at a gun range under the effects because they were responsible. The sad fact is that not everyone is responsible and we cannot be a free state and prevent that. All the forms in the world can’t change that.

    • John Henry Bicycle Lucas November 18, 2016, 1:16 pm

      I agree, Steve. I had to pass random drug screens since 1988 under DOT regs. I don’t partake and I don’t approve of the stuff. You can make rope out of my part of that stuff.

    • LibertyRick November 18, 2016, 3:22 pm

      Neither Marinol nor Drabinol (the one I take for nausea) contains any THC and anyone blogging here who says otherwise is a liberal cretin. With that said, it is possible to feel the effects since much of the physical benefits of cannabis come from the CBD (cannabadiol). Here is a federal site about CBD https://www.drugabuse.gov/…to…/biology-potential-therapeutic-effects-cannabidiol.
      The problem is twofold. First the federal govt. owns ALL patents – let me repeat the federal govt “owns” ALL patents related to any beneficial use of cannabis sativa or indica but neglected to include ruderalis (mostly used for hemp fiber). Second big pharma circumvent the patents by law so they encourage and support the cretins at the FDA and DEA from reclassifying from Sched I to no scheduling or at worst Schedule V.
      We MUST continue to legalize it in every state and when there are 75% of the states collecting billions in tax revenue from their state-run (uh,communism) controls, Congress will have enough weight to totally overturn the arcane and illegally promulgated marijuana laws (Marijuana Tax Act 1937, et al). Then we can focus on the illegal drugs that actually do harm like meth, heroin, and legal but highly abused cocaine, fentanyl, and oxycodone to name a few. Treatment has been shown to be a solution whereas incarceration has been an utter failure. We must rid ourselves of any politician still living in the early 20th century regarding cannabis. The medical benefits alone demand it.

  • Steve November 18, 2016, 9:54 am

    I am not sure how the country survived before the 1930’s when MJ became illegal. It was lucky for us that the Overlords realized that “Reefer Madness” would end us all and made it illegal! It’s a gateway drug, just like mothers milk, and leads to other hard drugs like Heroin!! It’s amazing what got done without Nanny guidance!

    Don’t play the Bloomberg Game – don’t blame inanimate objects for what people do. If you start down that path you can create a list of prohibitions that bans nearly everyone. We have RSO’s to decide if acts of shooters get them booted, and without blood testing at the door you could NEVER know if someone is a user of a banned substance. Opioid users can be really buzzed and be the most personable and normal appearing person on the line. It’s the way it is.

    MJ is still illegal as far as the Feds are concerned. If that infringes on your rights, in your opinion, then work to get it changed. The people of several states have done so. Using it now STILL violates federal law, the ATF will still try to enforce that. I see no argument about that, but I find it humorous that they clarified that question. IQ test indeed.

    Ignorance about MJ, its effects and duration provide a shield for some. If you think MJ users are not among those driving and doing ordinary day to day activities all around you, you are wrong. They are out there and you cannot expect them to behave like Cheech and Chong any more than alcohol drinkers all act like Foster Brooks or W.C. Fields.

    You could be in a shooting lane or shooting Clays next to someone who “vapes” weed every day and not know it and probably could not smell it on them. They would not, in most cases, represent any greater danger to you than anyone else on the line, and probably less danger than a newbie with a gun. Now go back and substitute “drinks” for “vapes ” and it’s still true. Substitute “uses opioids legal or not” and it’s the same.

    Responsible people do not use anything that will affect their behavior and motor skills when shooting, but not everyone shooting is responsible. If you want absolute safety stay home, there is no such thing in the real world.

    Then again, all the gun laws in the country won’t be effective when we’ve got OBozo granting pardons to criminals convicted of gun charges. One report placed the percentage of gun crimes pardoned vs the total pardons he issued at 20%. And he issued hundreds. You can bet those pardoned had a drug related conviction as well and weren’t likely readers of this forum. I wonder how many he’ll give out as going away presents!

    I count the days until he’s evicted and out of work.

    • JoshO November 18, 2016, 10:35 am

      Good points. Many MJ users are so habitual that they act completely normally and almost always have it in their system. I’ve skiied/snowmobiled in the backcountry, kayaked pretty gnarly ww and MTB steep and rugged trails with people that get high at the top and it actually enhances their performance. It effects people differently, like any pharmaceutical.

      I’ve seen guys do things on skis or a bicycle that defy physics and are really pretty incredible. It does not impair everyone.

      • neil November 18, 2016, 1:05 pm

        What does impair EVERYONE is the District of Criminals!

    • Vieteran November 18, 2016, 6:08 pm

      I have a buddy who is an opioid prescribed vet, he never gets buzzed from it because the medication the VA gives him is MS Contin which is time released morphine. There are a lot of people who take this medication for chronic pain due to illness and injury as well as degenerative diseases of the bone and joints, and because of the time release property of the drug it simply does not produce an intoxication effect. Much misinformation and misconception is out in the public about opioids, but if taken as directed they pose little to no risk of impaired mental acuity or physical capability. Such is NOT the case with people who abuse prescription pain medications, mostly because they exceed the prescription dose in order to get “buzzed”, which is really a poor term to describe opiate intoxication since this class of narcotics are central nervous system depressants and have no stimulant or psychoactive effects.

      • Irish-7 November 19, 2016, 2:13 am

        Great point! I made a similar statement (@ 1153) earlier today.

    • Gary L Moore November 18, 2016, 6:37 pm

      Very well said sir!

  • rick November 18, 2016, 9:40 am

    Ah.. for the good old days of pre-1968 and earlier.

  • Frank Silano November 18, 2016, 9:30 am

    With so much to do in our country why are law makers wasting time on stuff like this? We need to vote these “check list” people out of office.

    • Tony November 18, 2016, 9:56 am

      Very simple. It is easy to arrest and prosecute law abiding individuals, much more so than criminals.

      • Paul Goldstein November 18, 2016, 12:32 pm

        Of course you are correct. And let’s not forget that the DEA, which for thirty years has abjectly failed to stem the flow of illegal narcotics into this country, has recently EXPANDED its mission to aggressively audit the prescribing of LEGAL pain-control meds (such as Vicodin, Percocet, Hydrocodone, OxyContin, etc). because suddenly there is an “epidemic” of opioid overuse (if you believe the MSM, who, by the way, receive their broadcast licenses from the same government that so ineptly operates the FDA and DEA). 97% of responsible pain-control medicine users must now face additional restrictions on obtaining these indispensable meds because 3% of people abuse their use.

        Doesn’t this sound exactly like the government claptrap used to control/inhibit/deny firearms purchases by the law-abiding??

        One thing is clear — once a bureaucracy is created, no matter how ineffective it proves to be, it is never dismantled. Its mission is simply tweaked to justify its existence and, sad to say, its expansion. You & I, my fearless, gun-toting, law-abiding, freedom loving, brothers and sisters, need to be CONTROLLED!! As always, you are welcome to disagree.

    • Austin Mabry November 18, 2016, 10:07 am

      This isn’t the work of lawmakers. It’s the work of unelected bureaucrats. And they do it to try to justify their own existence.

      • Dale Bailey November 18, 2016, 10:52 am

        The best comment I’ve seen on this article ! Bureaucrats need to be changed more often than politicians and NEVER ALLOWED TO MAKE THE RULES !

        • JoeEnglish November 18, 2016, 12:30 pm

          They’re only employee’s if they can’t make rules!

  • Amanda November 18, 2016, 9:24 am

    One thing no one has mentioned is that if you have medications or medical marijuana, prescribed by a dr, then you do NOT have it unlawfully!! So the answer would still be NO. 😉

    • Albert November 18, 2016, 9:54 am

      Under FEDERAL law, it is STILL illegal, even if prescribed by a doctor. That is the sad truth. Until the phoney war on drugs is stopped, we will have to suffer.

      • JoeEnglish November 18, 2016, 12:35 pm

        Perhaps it is illegal under federal “rules” but how does that translate to the federal gvt getting prescription information under dr/pt privilege? My Dr stated that his scripts are not under fed purview unless a warrant is written.

    • Chas November 18, 2016, 10:07 am

      They actually mention that quite clearly. Irregardless of it being legal in your STATE, it is still illegal at the FEDERAL level and therefore you are an unlawful user.

      • John November 18, 2016, 10:46 am

        “Irregardless” is NOT a word. It’s either “irrespective” or “regardless.”

        • wes November 18, 2016, 12:09 pm

          Up to 10 years in jail, irrespective, regardless or irregardless of the English proper.

  • Steve Malafy November 18, 2016, 9:15 am

    Most people who use medical marijuana take it in an oil form and it does not make you high as smoking it does. There are two species of marijuana, one gives you a high and the other does not.

    • Max November 18, 2016, 10:50 am

      Actually they are not different species. They are different strains created through selective breeding to increase the various cannabinoids, of which there are about 113. CBD, or cannabidiol, is the so-called pain reliever form, while THC or tetrahydracannabinol is the psychoactive form.
      While I don’t prescribe it, many of my patients use it either recreationally or for pain or anxiety management.

      • steve November 18, 2016, 1:59 pm

        while you are (mostly) correct about CBD and THC (it is now being shown that often marijuana, or other forms of the drug with both THC and CBD are more effective than CBD alone, and that THC is more effective for pain (and even other symptoms) than previously thought.
        also yes, there are different strains of marijuana, but there are also different species. there are actually three: sativa, indica, and ruderalis.

    • Nathan Rich November 18, 2016, 10:57 am

      Your 1% right Steve, there are 2 kinds of Marijuana. Sativa and indica. The rest of what you said is wrong. They both get you high. Indica is a couch high, Sativa is a heady motivating high. They are also cross breeding these two types in least half of the plant species. So unless you’re some kind of an expert, or buy medical, it’s impossible to know what you got. The other huge difference nowadays is that it varies from really crappy quality Mexican grown dirt weed 2 the oil that you speak of that can be upwards of 70% THC. I’ve seen people who used that and had panic attacks almost every time they did.

      The most relevant argument against this change is that alcohol and guns is a way bigger problem, . The second most relevant argument is that they will soon have to change these forms when marijuana becomes federally legal, and our Idiot government can finally tax it and pay off our debt. 70% of our marijuana comes from Mexico, so if they legalize It, they would also take all that money out of the hands of the Mexican drug cartels, and then you could focus on the real drugs.

  • Daniel Keating November 18, 2016, 9:06 am

    The problem with this is 2 fold. The federal government relies on the states to enter arrest records, pot tickets etc that get put onto your records that filter on up or are searchable in a database for the background check. Now that pot is legal in Wash, Calif, Oregon, Colorado etc there are not going to be any entries –unless the person gets caught with more than the personal allotance/crossing state lines etc.
    Medical users are HIPPA protected–or should be–but we hear of the feds tapping the states to cough up card holder info like in Oregon a while back. If you are at a FFL dealer and your pot card falls out of your wallet with your DL then yes he can stop the sale

  • Ken Sawyer November 18, 2016, 9:05 am

    You can bet I am in” moderation
    and you put me there because I do not agree with the junk you sponsor. In the process your thinking is why the gun lobby againest guns are on our case.You have brought the heat into a legitimate organization. You are money hungry and trying to protect the rights we have.do me a favore an quit sending this crap to my computer.Ken Sawyer

  • Ken Sawyer November 18, 2016, 9:01 am

    Good luck in adding anything here without first a commercial.. I see also Guns America does not respond to emails. I ahve asked for my name and company be removed from you email commerials. I went to the website, signed in as a legal member of this organization and was not sent an email in response. I want out of this crap hole and do not want anymore emails sent to my email address.Ken Sawyer

    • Colohunter November 18, 2016, 2:17 pm

      Ken Sawyer, if you don’t want to be a part of GA then you have to unsubscribe at the bottom of the page. GA or any other forum will unsubscribe for you. This post was not a dig at the ATF by GA it was to inform us of the changes. Most of us think it was a waste of money for the ATF to make the changes but that does not reflect on GA. Please take your temper tantrum to the bottom of the page and leave on your own accord.

  • A Shot in the Dark November 18, 2016, 9:01 am

    Let me get this straight. If you’re addicted to alcohol or drugs they won’t let you purchase firearms?
    What happens when they find out I’m an addict? I’m addicted to buying more and more firearms?!?! I can’t stop!
    I’m the founder of GA, Guns Anonomus! LOL

  • mtman2 November 18, 2016, 8:52 am

    The BATFE along with any other unConstitution so called agencies- by definition are illegal and need to be nixed. The only “list” gun dealers need
    is of felons+mental cases on FBI file whereupon a photo Drivers License or Birth Certificate with a current utility bill/ins. policy ID must be shown then typed into that computer “list” for a match or not. This should protect the gun store from legal action of future law suits +/or culpability.
    Just a thot on uncomplicating new purchases- that’s as far as I’d go ~!

    PS- Of course showing false ID to purchase firearms would be an additional felony for those caught there or later…

    • mtman2 November 18, 2016, 9:01 am

      Strawman purchases would most likely be repetitive and could be seen as such later(to felons+ineligible’s for profit) and penalties would apply in the severity of said firearms later use.

  • Willie November 18, 2016, 8:52 am

    The form is foolish. It asks a person to self define as “An unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana”. For one if my state has legalized use of marijuana then I would identify myself as a lawful user… state rights trump federal law. And what addict ever identifies as being an addict? Plus I see a lot of people in the comments saying that someone who uses pot shouldn’t own a gun. People who smoke pot aren’t stoned all the time, they do have the ability to function and have the right to protect themselves. I believe all forms and background checks need to be done away with. They are unconstitutional and an infringement. Even a sales tax on bullets is an infringement. The same people that argue that pot smokers shouldn’t own guns are the same ones who own guns and occasionally are drunk themselves. Does a person need to be sober 100% of the time in order to own a gun? Well don’t ever take a sip of champagne at a wedding you hypocrite! I don’t smoke pot, but believe it should be legal to smoke in your own home. I believe even former felons should be able to legally purchase guns, they did their time and should not have to run around paranoid because they can’t defend themselves. Charge people with crimes when they commit them and mandate personal responsibility for your own self defense. Cops should be the last line of defense. I wouldn’t go as far as mandating gun ownership, but you should be able to use a knife or have some other self defense skills. The namby pamby culture of turning our own safety over to our overlords makes us one step away from total tyranny. Soon we’ll be as helpless as the British. Abolish the ATF and all the other alphabet soup gangsters!

    • Jason Cogburn November 18, 2016, 9:16 am

      State rights do not trump federal law. Go smoke a bone and leave the legal stuff to others.

      • sam November 18, 2016, 10:05 am

        Why are you here?

      • Henry Bowman November 18, 2016, 12:25 pm

        Wrong Jason.
        You need to go back to school and take civics.
        All powers not delegated to the Gov’t are held by the states and the people.
        There is no constitutional authority for the federal gov’t to ban a plant that grown in the wild in the US.
        You would readily relinquish your rights to the feds, so just go turn in your guns..

    • Mark Are November 18, 2016, 9:22 am

      EXCELLENT common sense response! You apparently haven’t had your brain fried in a public school. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED MEANS EXACTLY THAT! Records prove that a number of the founding fathers were cannabis users. You know…the same guys that PENNED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Tyrant enforcers need to feel the wrath of we the people. And yes….FIRST it was the STATES, THEN the “Federal” (more like a ferel) government. The Federal government didn’t create the states. DUH? The Fedeal government we have today is an out of control tyrannical entity that is NOT given consent to even exist by many of us. It exists as a LAWLESS entity that has no respect for the rights of ANYONE.

    • Chip jacques November 18, 2016, 9:25 am

      The question that you answer makes it a legal action against you if you lie. It may be found out anyway that a pot user had done that since the DEA has now drafted a law submission for doctors to turn over records to nics

      • JoeEnglish November 18, 2016, 12:48 pm

        First, the DEA can’t write law. They can only write regulations, and those regs have to be approved by congress and they also have to have a cost/benefit study attached to it. Please provide substance to your statement!

    • John Smith November 18, 2016, 9:58 am

      Owning a firearm is not a right granted by the state. It is a federal only privilege.

      • Austin Mabry November 18, 2016, 10:11 am

        Firearm ownership is a right RECOGNIZED by the Constitution. It is neither a “privilege” nor is it up to the feds.

      • GunSmoke November 18, 2016, 10:12 am

        Federal Privilege???????????
        This is your brain on drugs!
        Why you you think they call it Dope?

      • Bill B November 18, 2016, 10:18 am

        It is not a right granted by any Government agency. It is a protected Right under the Constitution that the government cannot infringe upon.

  • Frustrated November 18, 2016, 8:50 am

    This age old problem just keeps getting worse. How do we seperate the good guys from the bad guys? I have always believe that adding more and more rules to the already strict guns laws would do nothing to stop the bad guys, who ignore the existing laws anyway. Now, it’s hard to know which side of the fence I’m on. Over the last 60 years of gun ownership, I’ve bit by bit become criminalized, by just having a magazine that holds a couple rounds too many, or just failing to lock up my gun at home, and too many other subtle ways to count.
    I am a strong supporter of 2A, and I also think guns are being sold to a lot of people who should not have one. There should be at least some minimal training class required, free to those who cannot afford it, in safety and handling.
    Pot and guns? No easy answers. I have a carry permit. If I wanted to get a medical marijauna permit, I would have to give up the CCW permit. That’s exactly as it should be.

    • Dan J November 18, 2016, 9:53 am

      Funny thing is, you CAN be stoned out of your mind on Oxycodone and STILL buy a firearm. Strange?

  • mtman2 November 18, 2016, 8:45 am

    The BATFE along with any other unConstitution so called agencies- by definition are illegal and need to be nixed. The only “list” gun dealers need
    is of felons+mental cases on FBI file whereupon a photo Drivers License or Birth Certificate with a current utility bill/ins. policy ID must be shown then typed into that computer “list” for a match or not.
    Just a thot on uncomplicating new purchases- that’s as far as I’d go ~!

    PS- Of course showing false ID to purchase firearms would be an additional felony for those caught there or later…

  • William Schumacher November 18, 2016, 8:40 am

    I used to have a FFL and I was informed that a criminal does not have to correctly fill out the form as many of the questions call for self incrimination which is illegal under the fifth amendment. The only people who fill out this form correctly are law abiding
    citizens. A criminal can not be prosecuted for not tilling the truth on this form. This is a big waste of time and effort.

  • Shannon Jones November 18, 2016, 8:38 am

    Well I don’t drink or smoke and never have even tried either ( seriously I haven’t ), I have seen a lot of mean drunks over the years, lots of funny smelling folks but they are pretty relaxed folks. Keep a clear head when enjoying our shooting passion. Happy holidays !

  • John November 18, 2016, 8:32 am

    Form 4473 is just an IQ test. If you’re stupid enough to answer “Y” to any of the obvious “N” questions, you are likely too stupid to safely handle a firearm. Consider the idea that someone up there is actually trying to help us: by clarifying the statement, they are giving us a clear chance to realize that proclaiming our State-given legal consumption will STILL result in a Federal “DENIED” answer. So, in effect, they are loudly warning us what the effect of a truthful answer will be, without coming right out and suggesting that an applicant might perhaps choose the more discreet, if untruthful, answer.

    I don’t smoke, but I frankly don’t believe we should be filling out permission slips to exercise our rights. So instead of worrying about how the questions are phrased, let’s write to our representatives and get rid of Form 4473 altogether. Remember: write your reps. Donate to the NRA. Stay armed and ready friends.

    • Tom Carroll November 18, 2016, 9:08 am

      I, personally believe that as our constitution states “we have the right to possess firearms and to protect ourselves” (approximately). I believe that the current forms are adequate as almost all of the persons possessing firearms and killing or shooting at others are not permitted to legally own a firearm, are felons, have stolen weapons, and are trying to commit illegal acts. How many of people that have permits to carry commit those kinds of crimes.
      I rest my case.

      • Mark Are November 18, 2016, 9:27 am

        Gee, you rest your case and you don’t even know what the constitution says? Why don’t you at least go and read it before you jump to your keyboard.

  • Matt November 18, 2016, 8:32 am

    Everyone across the board is missing the real issue. Back in the day when you could just walk in and buy a gun and walk out with it they I.E. (families, doctors, and the courts) did a better job of keeping mentally disturbed people locked up and out of society. People that were not able to mesh with society were removed and everyone for the most part lived for the most part happy. Then somehow we (as a group) decided EVERYONE should have the same rights as everyone else. EVEN KILLERS AND PSYCHOS, even though giving them the same rights usually costs everyone surrounding them some if not all of theirs.
    Given the freedom the the right and ability to breed we Fast forward to today. Add hungry lawyers and 322 million people who don’t care about anybody but themselves……….
    We are worried and arguing about whether marijuana users should be able to buy a gun. Seems like the least of our problems.
    WAKE UP AMERICA. WE SLEEP IN THE BED THAT WE MADE. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL.

  • JM Taylor November 18, 2016, 8:18 am

    Well now wasn’t that an interesting legal precedent based end-run. States that approved MJ use also disapprove of firearms, they now have ATF blocking firearms sales for them. Didn’t see that coming, did you?
    Now let’s see how CA, NY, Chicago, and the ATF utilize national CCW reciprocity to protect your rights and privacy.
    How can that precedent be miss-used?

    • davis November 18, 2016, 9:27 am

      It is easy to misuse reciprocity. New laws can have plenty of pitfalls written into them. I see the sarcasm.

  • TSR November 18, 2016, 8:10 am

    What is interesting to me is that the verbal war between pot smokers and drinkers rages on. Each claiming the “other” is far worse than their own. Truth of the matter is, neither is appropriate in the presence of firearms. Pot remains traceable in your system for a very long time. In the event of a firearms related court appearance , this will surely work against you. You must ask yourself, “is it worth it?”. We all know that alcohol and firearms don’t mix. Laws are pretty explicit in this manner. In my opinion, pot gets the nod for being the worse of the two. It is no mistake that Democrats are pushing for the legalization of pot. Their support increases wherever it is legalized. The “dumbing down” of America, always works in their favor. Be strong, be straight, choose to be a responsible gun owner.

    • Rattlerjake November 18, 2016, 8:51 am

      You’re an idiot! Cannabis has been proven to be a strong medicinal herb that even kills cancer cells. This has nothing to do with “smoking” MJ, it has to do with the government and big pharma trying to prevent individuals from using cannabis products that are of medical value, so they can continue to push their expensive “legal” drugs, many of which are useless, have numerous side effects, and that actually kill people. Secondly, this form, the previous form, and the laws enforced by the ATF pertaining to “arms” are unconstitutional and therefore illegal. It is those morons who insist on “doing as the government says” that are enabling them to continue to enforce these illegal laws! The second amendment is very specific – shall not be infringed!

      • Jason Cogburn November 18, 2016, 9:19 am

        Shall not be infringed to law abiding citizens where pot is still illegal federally.

      • davis November 18, 2016, 9:34 am

        Name calling gets you nowhere. Just because your opinion differs from the current law( Note- CURRENT) does not make you right. Smoking is still banned regardless of the material smoked in most places not only for health reasons but fire risk dangers. As a retired medical professional we love smokers because they are a cash cow from a plethora of related diseases.

  • Steve November 18, 2016, 7:42 am

    It was not that long ago that firearms purchases were handled just like buying a longbow or crossbow, pay pick what you like, pay the cashier, walk out the door with your purchase. If you really hold to the second amendment right to non infringement, this is what you should be arguing, full and free purchase rights with no paperwork and no questions. I understand the argument of keeping firearms out of the reach of known criminals, we have laws that punish criminals for possession of a firearm and no law prohibiting their purchase will stop a criminal from making such a purchase. Since we can never keep guns out of the hands of the criminal element we need to stop passing infringing and misleading laws that do nothing more than to hinder law abiding citizens. We need a justice system that prosecutes criminal use of firearms to its fullest extent with no plea deals and no sentence reductions permitted. The only way to prevent criminal use of firearms is to keep those who would violate such laws locked up. Bottom line is that most 2A supporters are also for smaller less intrusive government, yet they still want big brother to keep records and files on us gun owners. Owning a gun is in no way something that should give our government the right to keep a file on us, our private life is our private life, and it should be kept out of government intrusion.

    • W. I. Capps, MD, JD November 18, 2016, 8:18 am

      While sharing your frustration, it is a mistake to conclude ANY freedom implicit in the Bill of Rights is complete or “free of impingement”. Should you doubt this, look at First and Fourth Amendment law and how it has changed (against individual rights) sense the Warren Court of the 1960’s. None of these freedoms are absolute, nor have they ever been. This tension between State and Federal Law should warn many that OTHER current ‘freedoms’ under State law may soon be assaulted.

    • Bob November 18, 2016, 7:41 pm

      We need a justice system that prosecutes criminal acts, especially violent ones, to the fullest extent. Murder, robbery, rape…leave the gun out of the equation, it is only a tool.

  • Reechard November 18, 2016, 7:39 am

    Apparently the ATF still thinks marijuana is addictive… I love how our federal government can simply ignore facts and continue to push rhetoric that has been proven wrong over and over. I’d take a medical (or recreational) marijuana user over a legally prescribed narcotic or opioid user any day. As has been stated above regarding alcohol… marijuana users don’t go into fits of rage and kill people while under the influence. To those saying they “don’t want potheads at the range with them”, use your brain. It’s illegal to be drunk at the range, and every state that has legalized has the same laws for being high as it does for being drunk. You can’t drink and drive, you can’t drink and shoot. You can’t smoke and drive, why the hell would it be legal to smoke and shoot?

    • Donald Trump November 18, 2016, 8:43 am

      It is ILLEGAL to handle firearms when under the influence. Your entire argument is null! There is no confusion- if it\’s \’addictive\’ or \’proven\’ to be safe. Ask a pot head to stop and all he/she will do is say, \”why- it\’s not addictive\”….meanwhile they just can\’t handle life without it. What does pot do that contributes specifically to society? All it does is breed another generation that has to be coddled and told \”it\’s ok, your personal feelings matter more than society\”

      • Troubled one November 18, 2016, 9:46 am

        Apparently you have never heard of a functional alcoholic. Ask an alcoholic to stop drinking. How many weapons related shooting incidents include people who were drunk? Personally I don’t deal with anyone who is drinking or high who wants to utilize ANY Weapons.

    • Irish-7 November 18, 2016, 11:53 am

      I disagree with your assessment that prefers a marijuana user over a legally prescribed narcotic patient. I’ve seen both sides of this argument. As a teenager in the late 1970’s, I smoked pot in high school. I gave it up when I entered the military. On the other hand, I took narcotic medications daily for my final 8 years in the Army. I suffer from multiple painful spinal conditions as a result of duty as an Airborne Infantryman. I believe that being stoned was far more intoxicating than taking opiates. (It is my understanding that the weed available today is far more powerful than the dope 40 years ago.) On the other hand (while taking narcotics), I qualified with every weapon system we had: M9 Pistol, M16A1/M16A4/M4 Rifle, M249 SAW, M240B and M2 HB Machine Guns. Granted, there are different types and levels of narcotic medications. I vividly recall a comrade that was shot during combat operations. He was given a shot of morphine. He was clearly “out of the fight” when that medication took hold. With the pills I was taking, I never felt impeded from performing any of my duties. These medications merely afforded me the mobility to function.

  • Mark Derscheid November 18, 2016, 7:25 am

    The states only have to abide by the Constitution not Federal Law. People have been duped into believing the color of law is actually law. The states hold the power in this Republic not the Fed!!!! If you are going to go after Marijuana users then it is only fair to go after alcohol users as well.

    • Christo November 18, 2016, 7:32 am

      FYI – Under federal law, booze is still legal, pothead.

      • Jefferson November 18, 2016, 8:01 am

        Outlawing neither is authorized by the Constitution, lunkhead.

        • Jason Cogburn November 18, 2016, 9:22 am

          Actually alcohol was outlawed by the constitution. However was ratified later in another amendment which proves any of the amendments can be amended again.

          • Mark Are November 18, 2016, 10:00 am

            And I have yet to see the amendment that outlaws marijuana.

          • Austin Mabry November 18, 2016, 10:17 am

            Also proving that if they want marijuana prohibition, they need to do it through the proper channels; with a constitutional amendment.

      • carl November 18, 2016, 8:23 am

        ANY addiction should stop the sale of firearms to someone who can not control their use of drugs or alcohol. Drinking is legal, yes, but selling a gun to someone who is drunk all the time seems a little unwise to me. Booze legal or not can at times be a real problem. It should be handled on a “case by case” one law cannot cover every case. I am however surprised that a new law just kind of popped up right after the election. It would have taken Congress to pass it….wonder why it wasn’t shot down….any new law on guns can’t be good. Were losing ground here a little at a time….now Trump is in I think were save for the next 8 years but after that???? I am against any new laws….

        • Austin Mabry November 18, 2016, 10:18 am

          It’s not a law. It’s the ATF unilaterally setting forth a decree.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 9:47 am

        But there was a time during the 1920s when the mere possession of booze was, indeed, a serious federal CRIMINAL offense, And so it made virtually everybody a Felon, therefore not able to possess a firearm…

        Except for one thing. The tyrannical 1968 Gun Control Act was not a law yet and no other so-called gun control statutes existed. In a less polluted and corrupted Constitutional environment back then, If you committed a violent crime with a gun, you simply were punished and went to prison for an appropriately adjudicated sentence mitigated or adjusted according to the conditions, severity, etc., of the offense. Which would often be a very long time or even life, where ALL your freedoms were suspended until you could be considered redeemable and rehabilitated enough to once again be integrated back into society as a law abiding citizen. Whereby ALL your rights were then picked up where they left off during your punishment.

        So if you killed someone by running them over with a car, punching them in the head with your fist kocking them down and cracking their skull open when they fell, or robbed a bank with a pistol, or stabbing someone in a drunken rage, But were then punished and ultimately paid your dues, you then returned to society STILL able to drive a car, use your hands, and keep a pistol or knife on you! The methodology or tactic of the crime was not a part of eternal permanent life long ‘Punishment’ of banning ownership of the object deployed in any crime! If you became a bad habitual criminal you eventually wound up in prison for life, killed by police. or executed by the state.

        It all worked well enough in the end in a reasonably objective paradigm with an emphasis for a heavy balance in favor of Constitutional Liberty preservation of personal Freedoms above everythig else, Including crime prevention and any specious notions of ‘public safety’. This was as designed in the Founding of an egalitarian American society.

        Why was that? Because back then before the post WWI American power elite began seriously strategizing a Totalitarian agenda for the future enslavement and financial control of the rapidly expanding population, The Constitution NEVER meant to have a permanent punishment Ban on guns EVEN for violent convicted felons! Because the Founders were NOT so pitifully STUPID as all of those who continue their brainwashed mantras of …

        “Oh, we can’t let dangeroous Felons have guns?” because they KNEW if would never just ‘stop’ there. They understood–unlike too many of us ‘holier-than-thou’ Moral Authoritarians– that this was always how the Royalist Elite eventually quietly disarmed, subjugated, and enslaved total populates of entire countries. They started with the bullshit mind control of who should have what and what the people can then be allowed to do, and we all–at least those of us not completely brain blown–know exactly and inevitably where gun control leads. Check out the almost absolute universal history lessons on this.

        Which proves that once ANY KIND…Even the most seemingly benevolent and of good intention– of gun control is implemented, there can ONLY be ONE insidious reason for it. Hint to the clueless: It Never was and Never will be the myth of ‘public safety’ or crime prevention.

        So the Framers provided Constitutionally guaranteed Protection that provided that our right to possess firearms ‘shall not be infringed’ PERIOD! NOT ‘except for mentally disturbed persons, or pot smokers, or alcoholics, PTSD Vets and eventually everybody else they can create a law for ‘enemies of the State’ to ‘fit’ you in! This was because the Visionaries who designed our lifestyles knew the Totalitarian power elite would eventually get around to disarming us with these useless and illegal law-legislation ploys to corrupt the Constitution for their tyrannical agendas..

        In other words the Framers knew that if there were no laws banning permanent firearm possession for any reason, there could NEVER, EVER be any Laws used to eventually totally disarm the Amerian citizenry!

        Like there are now in -your fucking face- with these new 4473 registration/confiscation mandates. Look back months and years on my warnings on this right here on the GA blog. I actually predicted this Pot trick on the 4473. And there was much more to it if Hellwench wasn’t derailed.

        Yet, Amazingly, now in mind numbed blissful compacency with our false sense security because of the POTUS upset, here most of us are…casually air heading in a debate about state v. G jurisdiction, or the ‘ambiguity’ of terminology on the forms.

        When we all should be immediately contacting the Trump administration through our Reps demanding they shut down this last ditch kamazi shot by the Obama regime to hold grouond. And get them serious about repealing the 1934NFA and the 68 GCA mentioned above in the article.

        “Oh, pray the lord to pity the fools who blithely facilitate their own destruction of liberty, if you so choose. But I prefer that the serious minided among us just administer to them a swift kick in the ass to wake them up!–P.J. Klipangle

        • Bob November 18, 2016, 7:46 pm

          Now that is a clear and concise analysis; an reflects my opinions perfectly.

    • rev_dave November 18, 2016, 8:26 am

      Your state may permit pot, and if so then IT won’t prosecute you. So if private sales without a background check are legal there, buy your gun privately. Feds will still deny the sale cuz pot is still illegal under fed law. Your FFL won’t help you get around that either cuz they’d come after his business and toss him in jail too.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 11:03 am

        But rev, think about what you said. All you are doing is temporarily getting around a pile of shit that you’ll step in later on!

        Technically–at least until the BATF administratively by Fiat decree decides that you can’t possess a firearm if you’re a pot smoker EVEN FOR A PRIVATE SALE. Like the Standard criminal situation where an ex con can’t have a gun no matter how they acquire it. Which exactly what will happen. And remember THAT test determining EVIDENCE OF WHICH SOMETIMES STAYS IN YOUR BODY FOR MONTHS AFTERWARD, is easily obtained. So future ‘evidence’ procurement to enforce their agenda is on the horizon,

        I’ve said this numerous times before, but it’s obviously still necessary with the type of dialogue we’re all engaged in, and mired down with here.

        So please indulge me one more time for the sake of the most precious of American Freedom.

        As some pointed out here. They’ve got us by the balls=coming and going–with the actual legislations because of the anti-Constitutional corruption factor they already have and are in full complete control of.

        You can temporarily ‘avoid’ compliance, but you can’t eliminate it. You can run, but you’ll never hide and eventually get caught in this current privacy deceased 4th/A environment

        With the implementation completion of the individual citizen precise location data base registration National I.D. Card (Real I.D. Act of 2005) You think this 4473 is bad, wait until they will interface your New edition National I.D. card (drivers license renewal) with the latest biometric trackers.

        Then they will have mandatory physical testing, of which the the State DOTs are already infrastructured for because of the over the road CDL testing, to see if you are using any kind of ‘substances’ that violate their newest laws the next time you get stopped by a cop for a traffic violation. The technology is already here. And it’s already being tested.

        If you test ‘positive’ for ANY drugs that could alter your cognizance, mood, pyhsyiology, or temperament, just like alcohol always was, you will be ticketed and fined. But this time you will be also banned from gun ownership.

        And since they are ‘getting away’ with this on their 4473s now,, What makes anybody here think they won’t get away with anything else as we blast down the slope of tyranny pedal to the metal?

        So notwithstanding all these worthless ‘legality’ issue debates,

        Will someone please tell me why the Fuck we are even having debates and discussions when there’s No getting around their obvious tyranny agenda anymore unless you’re a cognitively deceased idiot because of extreme overdose of brainwashing and all you do is try to ‘get around’ their LAWS while you hope and pray they’ll let you keep your BB gun if you admit you use ‘substances’ and promise you’ll comply with their agenda, because you submit that ‘some people just shouldn’t have guns’?!

        The only solution to end this fucked up debate once and for all is to repair the damage done by the agenda based gun laws and stop them in their tracks, like we obviously didn’t do with the BATF forms here.

        THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS TO REPEAL THE LEGISLATION (’34NFA and 68GCA) that is allowing ‘them’ to continue making MORE laws and administrative mandates because any Violation of those laws makes you a criminal which permanently bans you from ever owning a gun.

        ‘They’ can never disarm an entire citizenry if they can no longer, by law, impose permanent gun bans for criminal offenses.

        Permanent bans of ANY of your liberties FOR PREVIOUS illegal acts when you are currently a law abiding citizen not incarcerated IS A BLATANT TYRANNICAL CORRUPTION OF THE CONSTITUTION! And as you know, they’re Not going to and never will stop with just guns. Eventually it will be All ‘weapons’. And anything else that helps you fight against their tyrannical agenda.

        When Romney ran he wanted ex criminal offenders to be ‘banned’ from voting! Do you realize that only recently people are waking up to this? What a great ‘ban’ THAT’ WOULD BE? Want to assure your power is never challenged? Make custom made laws targeting your political enemy’s voting blocks making them criminals who can no longer votre, and sit back and enjoy an ‘untouchable’ power base!

        The problem is that with modern technology there’s no waking up from this type of nightmare.

        So there’s only one solution. One way stop it all. All gun control Laws MUST be overturned and reversed immediately in order to stop what is now far too egregious to make mythical public safety and crime prevention excuses for moral justification of an IMMORAL TYRANNY!
        ,
        And a law that prohibits virtually ANY Gun Control legislation on private citizens should be enacted.

        Remember, as evidenced by this new BATF change in the wake of a possible redemption of ourlost Liberties with the Trump upset.

        The Totalitarians are not wasting time ‘debating’ . The are regrouping for Tyranny tacticsright now. And planning for a counter attack in the coming elections.

        We must fall asleep in a specious comfort zone. We gotta continue the attack while we’ve still got a chance.

    • davis November 18, 2016, 9:09 am

      The states hold the power ONLY on intrastate commerce. Firearms are regulated as interstate commerce so YES the federal government can and does hold individuals at risk under the “most restrictive” portion at federal law. In other words if the Federal law is most restrictive it supercedes State law and vice versa.

    • Rattlerjake November 18, 2016, 10:25 am

      Fact is that neither the federal government nor the states have any “right” or authority under the Constitution to make prohibitive laws (malum prohibitum)! Their only responsibility in regards to law is to establish the punishments and enforcement of those punishments. Tyranny is government, either federal or state, establishing prohibitive laws which do nothing more than infringe on our God given rights which the Constitution reiterates. Strict punishments are the best prevention. Governmental prohibitive laws are nothing more than a way of generating more money for government to waste. There are only four types of crimes, 1) Death of an individual, 2) injury of an individual, 3) violation of an individual’s rights, and 4) damage/destruction of property.

  • Lou Gots November 18, 2016, 7:23 am

    This had been obvious, but it does no harm to clear up a possible ambiguity. Another needful clarification concerns the word, “user.” Once again, it should have been obvious that an addict or user of marijuana is one who is presently such, and not one who may have once been so at a point in the past..

  • Nick S November 18, 2016, 7:21 am

    This of course laughable, as pot users are much less likely to use a gun unlawfully than are alcoholics (most of the latter have never been adjudicated). Anger issues are very often fueled by alcohol while pot usually mellows people out. The big problem would be the aftermath of an otherwise lawful use of a gun in self defense. The person could be prosecuted (likely WOULD be prosecuted) even if other evidence proved a shooting was justified. The person would not have to be “high” but because THC stays in the system for days after use and a person has lied on the form, up to – what is it, five years? – could be the result.

  • Larry November 18, 2016, 7:13 am

    If you used pot in the past, how long ago must it have been since you last used it to honestly say you don’t use it? A year? 6 months? A month? A week? A day? They didn’t put much thought into that question.

    • Dude November 18, 2016, 8:01 am

      Well argued amigo. You should consider running for office.

  • Me November 18, 2016, 6:55 am

    If the law only applies to is peasants then I feel like its our duty to push the envelope.

    • FALPhil November 18, 2016, 8:41 am

      The elephant in the room that no one is talking about is that law in the USA has become meaningless. It is contradictory, volumous to the point of absurdity, often ignored for political purposes, and, worst of all, selectively enforced.

      So, you pays your money, and you takes your chances. The iron law of averages is in your favor.

  • John Lauhoff November 18, 2016, 6:51 am

    Anyone can lie about their use of medical marijuana. When getting a driver’s license a vet can have a veteran designation put on their driver’s license. This is voluntary. A driver’s license is typically required to purchases a firearm. A law requiring a medical marijuana user have a “medical marijuana” designation put on their drivers license would prevent hiding their use of marijuana. The user would have to produce their designated driver’s license to get the marijuana, not just a medical marijuana ID card.

    • Jim November 18, 2016, 10:29 am

      I call BS on that statement. Then there should be a law making you state on your drivers license that you have erectile disfuction or aids or cancer or what ever it is that you have. So much for your medical history being private.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 11:46 am

        Right on, Jim. Now some of us are beginning to get the whole problem behind having any permanent prohibitions/bans/restrictions on gun ownership other than if you are not currently incarcerated for an offense. They use these restrictions to put you in freedom sinking quicksand that you’ll never escape from. (intentional ending in the prep. for fascist grammarians out there)

  • D.Leli November 18, 2016, 6:36 am

    I am sorry, my fingers are too big for my amdroid. Please accept my apologies for the.misspelling.

    • mtman2 November 18, 2016, 9:11 am

      Get a stylis- a great idea for typing on your Android…

  • Nick C. November 18, 2016, 6:14 am

    The 4473,is a joke! I got stopped from a firearm purchase because a person fitting my name and description (white male) is a fugitive from justice, so I have to wait 6-8 months to buy from an ffl. That’s ridiculous, not to mention pot users will still by guns no problem, they can still mark no and atf can’t do anything out without a judges warrant. That shit is hippa protected! It’s ridiculous to worry about pot while any Fing drunk can buy a gun,SMH. I’m more worried about the nut jobs screaming about end times and crap. Why does it seem more law abiding citizens are stopped from firearm purchases by the 4473 than criminals??????

    • rev_dave November 18, 2016, 8:29 am

      Private sale, pay in cash.

      • davis November 18, 2016, 9:17 am

        Watch out for that one.. If a crime is committed with a firearm that you sold without proof or bill of sale is a pitfall. The LAST person listed with a 4473 is the one law enforcement will come for in that case. YOU are responsible for that firearm and any crime committed with it. It is quite common to be “questioned” if you sold a gun to a criminal. Note that person may NOT have been a criminal at the time of sale.

        • NNV November 18, 2016, 10:42 am

          No, you’re not responsible for it once you have sold it, if it’s legal to buy/sell privately in your State. The only responsibility you have is to make sure the buyer is a resident of your State. A gun I sold to a private buyer with a table at a gun show was used in a crime years later, I was contacted by law enforcement, I told them as much detail as I could remember about the transaction, never heard from them again.

      • Peyton November 18, 2016, 2:27 pm

        Private sales have been made illegal in my stste as have magazines holding more than 25 rounds. But pot is legal here in Colorado. No problems with that thus far after almost 3 years. Meanwhile drunk drivers have killed scores and scores of people in this state. This change too the form is totally without merit of any kind. It is simply tyhe BATFE reminding us that “We are in Charge and always will be”. et BATFE is not e is just a Bureaucracy not legislative body that can “make laws” nor is it responsible to the voters as they get no vote. BATFE should be held accountable somehow and its legitimate law enforcement duties turned over to the FBI and BATFE disbanded all together. Such an organization as the BATFE the ay it makes law by degree and enforces it has no place at all in representative democratic republic.

    • jimbob November 18, 2016, 9:52 am

      There is a box on the 4473 for a Unique Personal Identification Number (UPIN). Ask for one from ATF…it works and your problem goes away. I speak from experience, as my very common name always resulted in a “Delay.” Now that I have a CPL license, I don’t even need that as a call-in to ATF is no longer needed (another option.)

  • Tom C Snook November 18, 2016, 6:03 am

    I get the concerns we should have for any abuse of power to infringe our 2nd Amendment rights. But I’am also sure I don’t want Cheece and Chong next to me at the range. I mean, it’s bad enough when some yahoo has his sober giggly girl friend shooting off a hand gun her first time with the yahoo’s .50 cal Desert Eagle. I think we who have been in the sport as long as I have (40 + yrs)…we have seen an increase of gun owner/users who do not have a hunting background (essential for awareness and safety) versus the lack of spatial awareness that has been increased due to a generation reared on video games. Enough said.

    • Reechard November 18, 2016, 7:44 am

      The wonderful thing about sobriety laws is they don’t usually specify “under the influence” as strictly alcohol. In your state, if it is illegal to be at the range while drunk, then it would be illegal to be there while high too. I’d be more worried about people who are legally prescribed antidepressants, antipsychotics, and narcotics that are perfectly fine to buy guns according to the BATF.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 12:27 pm

        Well, Reeeetard, oops, i mean Reechard.

        So you’re ‘ more worried about people who are legally prescribed antidepressants, antipsychotics, etc.? who are perfectly fine to buy guns according the the BATF’ are you?

        Well, don’t fret, my dear, I guarantee you’d be even ‘more worried’ if the person who needed the drugs to live a normal life were ‘off’ their meds and could no longer control their anxiety, manager their bursts of anger,, or avoid perceiving you as evil incarnate in their paranoid delusions and act out in self defense against fucking imbeciles who let bullshit like that which is none of their fucking business ‘worry’ them so much?

        But before that happens your obvious diagnosable OCD with controlling other people’s IN-FUCKING-ALIENABLE right to own a gun which is also in criminal conspiracy with the Tyrannists’ just because YOU don’t THINK they should have them or LIKE the idea of having a gun that only Holier-than-thou Moral Absolutists like yourself should be allowed to have, will get you officially diagnosed in the same sinking loveboat with them! If the Totalitarians recoup a comback? hahahhah!

        So make sure you take your meds then, reechard, and don’t try to lie about it on the forms!

    • Larry Abrams November 18, 2016, 9:08 am

      Agree 100% Tom. When I was 13 I was required to take a hunter’s safety course before I could get a general hunting license. This was in the 50s and the safety rules stick with me an my friends to this day.. Nothing ticks me off more than see someone in a sporting goods store waving a hand gun around, or being at the range and seeing someone with a semi auto fire a couple shots and then turn the gun my way while looking at it.
      I know that is is our right to own firearms but I think the right to own has gone to the extreme. The gun shows now have become their own worst enemy. I have watched FFL dealers have their (quote) own private stock sell to people who shouldn’t own cap gun. Example, I over heard two guys whispering about they could buy a gun from a dealer who had his private collection there. and watched the deal in cash take place right next to me. No record check, No ID shown. Just cash and a gun. We need back ground checks and those caught in illegal ownership or crimes involving firearms given prison time.

      • Bob November 18, 2016, 7:58 pm

        Larry, I call BS on you. I don’t know what state you live in, but Texas didn’t mandate a hunter safety class until the 1990’s, and I doubt any other state mandated one in the 1950’s. And a licensed dealer may absolutely sell his privately owned firearms, just like you or I can. They are not “stock”, they are personal property. Get your liberal bass outta here.

  • jefferson November 18, 2016, 5:36 am

    Every seed bearing herb is good.
    2001 us govt patent on cannabis. Cures cancer, everything.
    another method to pull firearms out of citizens hands… misdemenor d.v. etc..
    The plant was here before man & g govt. Should be exempt.
    interesting: grand jury aquits texan for killing swat member. They knew he had guns, and a medical mj card. Yay for texas, AMEN

    • Dan F. November 18, 2016, 8:24 am

      Man made laws to regulate the behavior of those who misuse chemicals. People who voluntarily remove their sobriety probably aren’t adult enough to have dangerous things, or as far as that goes, be trusted with important decisions.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 12:39 pm

        Dan, are you crazy, or just stupid? Oh wait. It occurred to me that you are probably one of those ‘religionists’ who think being intoxicated is evil and the devil’s work and all that shit. Even though Jesus himself was ‘known’ to take a nip or tuck at dinner. Was Old JEEEEze then not ‘adult’ enough to make important decisions???? I’m pretty sure he was ‘god’ enough? LOL! And there don’t seem to be many, if any laws in the bible to regulate the ‘misuse of chemicals’?

        You better take your brain in for a tune-up, danny boy?

        Didn’t you stop to think before making such an absurd statement that if drinking or intoxicants precluded anyone from making important decisions, THERE WOULDN’T BE ANYBODY LEFT TO MAKE ANY FREAKING DECISIONS, you prohibitionary nitwit!

    • mtman2 November 18, 2016, 9:16 am

      The health properties of non THC hemp oil is one thing.
      Tho high powered mega THC mariuana are totally different things…

  • Giovanni November 18, 2016, 5:21 am

    I don’t mind it at all if potheads are prevented from buying firearms. Furthermore, even those who consume alcohol in excessive amounts should not be allowed to buy or own firearms. As a range officer, I had to kick out several people who came to the range inebriated. Now that with Trump in the WH we have a chance to restore our gun rights, it would be a good thing if we started by policing our own ranks.

    • Nick S November 18, 2016, 7:32 am

      Just because a person uses pot, they are no more likely to go to a range high than someone who is drunk. Given the prevalence of alcohol use in our culture with far more usage and abuse than marijuana, this rule is stupid. To boot, if someone takes a medication (not pot) for a purposes that significantly help a disorder without being legal for some reason, should he or she be prevented from getting a gun?. Or someone who was convicted of a different type of a nonviolent federal crime? I don’t think so. This is one of those “he who casts the first stone” deals. Lots of ways for de facto gun control and this is one of them. It’s a slippery slope.

    • Jefferson November 18, 2016, 8:03 am

      Policing our own ranks … by having FedGov doing it?

      He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. – Thomas Paine

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 12:44 pm

      Yeah, I agree with you Giovanni. Lets start with our ‘own ranks’. I believe that all OCD holier-than-thou anti-2nd/A treasonous range officers should not be allowed to have firearms.

  • Puke November 18, 2016, 4:56 am

    While they’re at it, why not go ahead and prohibit porn addicts, left-handed people with fair skin, people whom are chronically late for appointments, and other subjectively immoral individuals from purchasing a firearm. Who’s going to answer that new question honestly? “Well, I came here to buy a gun today, but I just couldn’t fathom lying to the ATF, so nevermind.” Balderdash, I say.

  • richard karr November 18, 2016, 4:27 am

    Learn to drive a car..learn to use a gun,learn a work skill.they all require a little time frame or small test or practice…l’m a Vet an learned in the navy,but l had to learn, they did not say,take this gun a shoot it,they taught me how,FIRST.

    • Matthew Wurzel November 18, 2016, 7:46 am

      Tests can be manipulated to make it impossible for anyone to own a gun so no to that. Firearms training though should be offered to anyone buying a gun.

    • DRAINO November 18, 2016, 8:53 am

      That was for the Navy’s liability purposes, that they taught you. Owning a gun IS a guaranteed RIGHT by the constitution. YOU are liable for any damages that may be caused by the use of that gun. Learning is up to YOU. But it is NOT a condition for the right to keep and bare arms. Driving and learning a work skill are not rights AT ALL…..and definitely NOT guaranteed by the constitution.

  • Naturalist November 18, 2016, 3:35 am

    The BATFE is an Abusive out of control infected arm of the Governmentr that needs to be amputed immediately.

  • Jack Davis November 18, 2016, 3:34 am

    Okay on the marijuana, but what about any other illegal drugs? At point of sale the firearm seller should be able to take the purchasers finger print and a photograph in order to insure an honest purchase. We have to provide a photograph in obtaining a drivers license.
    I’m a licensed concealed carrier and a veteran. I stand solid on our Constitution, 2nd Amendment. Any person not able to prove their a legal citizen should NEVER be granted a firearm purchase. Purchasing any firearm is NOT a given privilege without creating proof of identity. I was in a manager in selling firearms through an outdoor sports business and never was I confident the 4473’s were being completely checked by A.T.F. however, we were required to allow A.T.F. to inspect all 4473’s on file. There has to be a better way to confirm a persons right to make a weapon purchase at point of sale. Our current technology should give the seller an ability to verify by requiring the purchasers finger print and photograph. Not any different than those of us who’ve taken a concealed firearm course providing full set of finger prints and photograph. Even those of us who’ve served in our military being well trained on many firearms still have to provide identity in order to make a firearm purchase.

    • jerry November 18, 2016, 4:17 am

      I still believe that you should not have to have at permission to purchase firearm. The Constitution does not give the feds that power.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 18, 2016, 12:51 pm

        That’s essentially it, Jerry. But all these mentally challenged people here can’t seem to grasp that.

        That’s why they’ll never get their rightful true 2nd/a legacy to own and keep a firearm without ANY form of infringement..

    • Stephan November 18, 2016, 4:37 am

      The buyer needs to go through a NICs check If they are drug users, then they have lied on the 4473. If they are not citizens, then they lied on the 4473. If they bring their relative to buy a gun, then they are creating a straw-man purchase. As an FFL dealer, prior to the NIC check, and if I was unsure of the identity of the buyer or if I didn’t care for the demeanor or smell of their clothes, it was no-sale!

    • Fred November 18, 2016, 5:37 am

      You have lost your mind already too many stipulations know u want a gun dealer to finger print a buyer customer that’s nuts

    • Scott McIntosh November 18, 2016, 5:54 am

      You sir sound exactly like the politicians and media that use fear and intimidation to try and subvert the 2nd Amendment. Registration always leads to confiscation. The BATFE is out of control and needs to be amputated. I am a Veteran as well and although we disagree I appreciate and honor your Service.

    • Michael Angelo November 18, 2016, 6:31 am

      The form 4473 is sufficiently laid out . Additional information And changes ad nothing of significance to the existing form . I have had an FFL for 30 years and when called by the ATF to trace a firearm from 25+ years ago had no trouble with identification . Complicating and changing a system that works fine is a symptom of bureaucratic meddling and job creation at the taxpayers expense.

      • Joe McHugh November 18, 2016, 8:44 pm

        What “trace”? Individual gun sales have no requirement to either go through a N.I.C.S. check, or to fill out a Federal form # 4473.
        I have a neighbor named “Bob”. Bob is a member of a gun club where he can target shoot. When he decides to purchase a new rifle or shotgun, he finds another gun club member who also wants to get a new firearm. They go through all of the nonsense at the gun dealer’s place and buy the firearm that the OTHER ONE wanted. At a later point they exchange firearms and settle on the price differential.

        OK, what actually happened here? Well, the “trace” that you alluded to, was stopped in its tracks. Consider the following scenario. A law enforcement officer comes to “Bob’s” door and inquires about the rifle that he bought at the gun dealer’s store. Like a good citizen, Bob provides the information that he resold the rifle to a third party, but for the life of him, he can’t remember the name or where he might be located.

        You know the the federal form # 4473 is a joke because the criminal class laughs at it. Bob and his unnamed buddy? They did nothing illegal and all they can be criticized for is having poor memories.

    • paul linski November 18, 2016, 6:33 am

      jack where is your head at not with the 2nd amendment i see? fingerprints come on dude ? your finger prints in the military were for indentifying your but on the battle field duh! Your drivers license should be more than enough for id. yes i have a concealed carry permit and yes i took the class.but the right to carry is a constitutional right were there finger prints called for in its drafting? Records kept of all citizens in the 13 colonies ? THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!!!!

    • D.Leli November 18, 2016, 6:33 am

      Good ides with showing I.D. to purchase a firearm , maybe one have ro be needed to vote.

    • Dick E Thorsen November 18, 2016, 6:36 am

      Mr Davis,
      Being an FFL myself we do have to list and document the pertinent info the photo ID lists for the purchaser already. My state already requires not only picture ID be used (all states do) but we also have a firearm owner ID card that also has a photo. Secondly only previously arrested and convicted criminal’s fingerprints are used and kept on file for identification / while law abiding and certain other professions are fingerprinted to scrub or use for exculpatory purposes NOT for identification only. Being a citizen is not a current requirement for purchasing a firearm in the USA, and having to prove a persons legal status in our country is an arduous task thanks to democrats and sanctuary cities. If I’m reading your comment correctly you are taking a stance that is frighteningly fascist in design. We should not need to provide anything more (information)than what is already currently required. All that your are suggesting are more hoops for the law abiding to go through that would impede the good from exercising their inalienable right.
      Technology Mr Davis isn’t always a good thing and should always be scrutinized when our inalienable rights listed in our Constitution are up for consideration.There are many laws already on the books regarding guns, you may want to read them over before requesting additional ineffective and quite frankly slippery slope registration style processes.
      DT

    • Altoid November 18, 2016, 6:48 am

      With all of our fancy new hi-tech identity stuff, there should be no longer any need for filling out a 4473. The form should be scrapped. It’s obsolete. One quick ID check and that’s it. After a very short period of time (like about 15 seconds) the computer record of the transaction needs to be permanently deleted. When it’s that simple, the FBI can handle the details and the ATF can be scrapped as well. It too, is obsolete.

      Driver’s licenses already have photos, names and addresses. No need for further identification. If illegals are the worry, then the federal government needs to step up, do its job and enforce immigration law. It also needs to crack down on states that would issue driver’s licenses to illegals.

      The last thing we need are more gun controls. It would seem to any rational individual that you contradict yourself when you say that you stand firm on the second, because you in fact do not.

      Just read the 2A again and again. You’ll get the point eventually.

    • MAS November 18, 2016, 6:58 am

      There should be NO infringements upon law abiding citizens UNALIENABLE RIGHT to keep and bear arms!

    • srsquidizen November 18, 2016, 7:20 am

      The prohibition against any other “unlawful” use of any other “controlled substance” is still in there even though ATF seems to be picking on pot users. Funny thing though, a person can be high as a kite on opiates prescribed by their doctor but if they haven’t been diagnosed as an addict they’re ok to buy a gun–they haven’t broken any law federal or otherwise.

      I’m for improving the system too. NICS sucks. Bad guys slip through the cracks and too many good guys get put on “delay” for no reason. That has happened to me even though I’ve bought guns many times and am perfectly eligible. After 3 days the “proceed” did come through and had to drive back to the dealer over 60 miles away. There should be a form of positive ID you can get from the government (preferably free since we’re talking about a Constitutional right) so you can skip all that BS.

    • JD MAK November 18, 2016, 8:08 am

      Mr. Davis,
      Wow, a real life veteran AND a licensed concealed carrier? Stop the presses. I’m all that AND former LE, former private military contractor, former weapons instructor and security professional, and none of those things qualifies me to speak with authority on the Constitution or Constitutional law. Being a vet doesn’t imbue you or me with any magical powers or special insight into the workings of our great republic.
      Current regulations require that a valid government-issued identification document that contains the photograph of the purchaser be presented to the FFL holder in order to complete the transaction. I fail to see how prints and a photo would do anything to establish citizenship. Perhaps you’d be happy if we should also be required to give blood and hair samples to the Feds?
      Besides, citizenship is NOT a requirement to purchase firearms. So, your argument is a nonsense one from the start. LEGAL immigrants and green card holders can normally purchase and possess firearms in the United States, as long as they have been residents of their current state for 90 days.
      Also, I don’t know what planet you come from, but here in the United States of America, the state that we reside in takes our photo for us when we apply for our drivers licenses. We don’t supply our own photos.
      And lastly, you wrote, “Even those of us who’ve served in our military being well trained on many firearms…”. Wow…really? You sure about that? Troops that are not in a combat arms related field receive basic familiarization training. As far as the rest, unless they are high speed-low drag operators, they get the minimum training required to have them display a basic proficiency with their weapons and trust me, it’s no great shakes. There isn’t a single regular grunt who was sent into combat wishing he had been given less training. The term “well trained” only applies to a very small fraction of our military.

      • John November 18, 2016, 1:23 pm

        JD Mak,
        I am retired from the military and was a medic. That is as you know not a combat arms related field and I can guarantee you that I have more than just the “minimum training required to have them display basic proficiency”. I would list my credentials but that is boring. Just so you know I qualified marksmen on every weapon I was allowed to fire to include those that I could not carry due to being a medic. My primary weapons were the M16 and M9 but as a weapons courier during some deployments with various units I got to fire many more at the range. It is pretty sad when a medic could out shoot some of the military police on the range. When you compare a military person to some of those buying guns in the civilian sector even the basic proficiency, as you put it, is above the knowledge level that some civilians. The key word is some. I had gained my knowledge by growing up in the backwoods where if you didn’t learn to be proficient with a weapon you may not have dinner. So not all of military members that are not in a combat arms related field are as inept with weapons as you may think.
        I do want your opinion on a thought I just had about your comment “Current regulations require that a valid government-issued identification document that contains the photograph of the purchaser be presented to the FFL holder in order to complete the transaction”. The VA ID card has my picture on it and is a government issued ID do you think they would accept it?
        On a separate note I want to thank you for your great service to this country both while in the military and as a civilian LEO.

Leave a Comment

Send this to friend