Chris Bartkowicz, Colorado-licensed medical
marijuana provider who was nevertheless arrested
by the DEA in February (AP Photo/KUSA-TV News,
Anna Hewson)
Related Articles
Gun rights advocates and marijuana legalization advocates are not often considered likely allies. Efforts to impose more onerous gun laws are overwhelmingly associated with liberal politics (although it is difficult to see anything "liberal" about a government monopoly on force--John Locke would certainly not recognize that brand of "liberalism").
On the other side of the coin, those who would don the "conservative" mantle tend to cast a gimlet eye on the idea of loosening drug laws, despite the fact that the enormous expenditure of resources required by the "War on Drugs" certainly doesn't seem to have "conserved" much.
Advocacy for both gun rights and marijuana law reform does fit neatly into a libertarian worldview, but the Libertarian Party has never managed to have much of an impact on the political scene, at any level.
A couple recent developments could bring a gun rights/marijuana refom coalition to the mainstream, though. The first of those developments is one we have discussed frequently here--the Firearms Freedom Act (whereby firearms manufactured in one state, and kept within the state, and thus not part of interstate commerce, are immune from federal regulation). Seven states (MT, TN, UT, WY, SD, ID, and AZ) have signed the FFA into law; in two more (AK and OK) the legislature has passed the legislation, and both governors are expected to sign; and sixteen other states (including Missouri) have at least proposed some version.
The federal government has already announced its intention to ignore state FFA laws (and the NRA has announced its intention to stay out of the legal battle). The FFA movement, in other words, will not go far without a fight.
State vs. federal battle lines are also being drawn on the marijuana law reform issue. Although the Obama administration announced last fall that federal law enforcement efforts would not be expended on medical marijuana providers and users who complied with state laws, that policy was cast into doubt with the DEA's arrest of Chris Bartkowicz, a Colorado-licensed medical marijuana provider.
Califronia might soon be upping the ante on the issue. If the state's ballot initiative to permit recreational marijuana use passes next November, the federal government is almost certain to object--forcefully (and DEA force can be quite deadly).
Another interserction of interests for the two camps of gun rights and marijuana law reform advocacy comes in the form of medical marijuana users/providers who are denied the right to buy a gun. This has already happened in California. More dramatically, in Kirkland, Washington, medical marijuana activist Steve Sarich was robbed by armed home invaders, resulting in a gun fight that left both him and one of his assailants wounded. Sarish was then disarmed by the police, and is now being prevented from buying replacement firearms with which to defend himself--despite being a known target of criminals (who also know that he is disarmed).
In the end, it is vital that we realize that state sovereignty is not a "conservative" issue, and nor is the right to possess the means to defend one's family, life, home, and liberty. Likewise, the right to choose what one puts into one's own body is not a "liberal" issue, even for those of us who would never choose to use substances which are banned or heavily regulated now. If the federal leviathan succeeds in keeping us divided, our piecemeal efforts to regain our rights will be easily turned back.
Atlanta: Ed Stone | Austin: Howard Nemerov | Boston: Ron Bokleman | Charlotte: Paul Valone | Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn | Cleveland: Daniel White | DC: Mike Stollenwerk | Denver: Dan Bidstrup | Detroit: Rob Reed | Fort Smith: Steve D. Jones | Grand Rapids: Skip Coryel | Knoxville: Liston Matthews | Los Angeles: John Longenecker | Minneapolis: John Pierce | National: David Codrea | Parkersburg: Nicholas Arnold | Phoenix: Douglas Little | Pittsburgh: Dan Campbell | Seattle: Dave Workman | St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann | Tucson: Chris Woodard | Wisconsin: Gene German
Comments
You've been reading Claire Wolfe again haven't you. :)
I think I share a great many beliefs with Ms. Wolfe. I don't, unfortunately, share her intellect and writing ability.
All liberties are entangled and inseparable. As long as you are not attacking, robbing, or defrauding someone, you have the absolute human right to live as you wish, no matter who may be offended.
I am an advocate of both gun rights and relaxed drug laws.
Gun rights, because of that silly Constitution thingy.
Relaxed drug laws, not because "the enormous expenditure of resources required by the 'War on Drugs' certainly doesn't seem to have 'conserved' much," but because when I look at the court cases that have eroded the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, it always seems to be over small quantities of drugs. Think civil forfeiture, RICO, SWAT teams, and the erosion of Posse Comitatus.
The War on Drugs is an excuse for the War on Our Rights.
State's Rights vs. Federal Rights. Hey, didn't we fight a civil war over this? The country was divided and the southern States wanted to leave the Union. Now we have a problem about State's Rights over unConstitutional laws. Will we be divided again? Probably, but this time, the number of States that want States Rights over unjust federal laws will be far greater than the last time. Will these States want to leave the union? Probably not, but will want the federal government to start following the restrictions placed on it by the Constitution. Who will win? My prediction, the right will prevail as it did the first time.
As a conservative and staunch gun rights proponent, I say let MJ be legal! For that matter, make all drugs legal! This is supposed to be a free country, why not let people actually be free? Just as long as you're on your own if you OD and don't transfer the financial burden to others.
I work at our Legislature for gun-owners' rights, and for drug-users' rights. It's not "conservative", or "liberal", but Libertarian.
Just too bloody bad that our Assembly hasn't had a Libertarian in office for thirty years, and not durn many libertarians, either.
Still, we do the best we can.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!