The American dilemma: cannabis versus gun

We know how much Americans cherish the Second Amendment of their Constitution: the right to bear arms. However, the total or partial legalization of cannabis in many states could well jeopardize this fundamental right. Cannabis patients and recreational users face a stark choice: carry a gun or use cannabis.

Whatever the status of cannabis in individual states, at the federal level it is a Type 1 drug in the same way as heroin or cocaine, and therefore an illegal substance. However, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives notice published in 2011: «anyone who illegally uses or is addicted to any controlled substance is prohibited from sending, transporting, receiving or possessing any firearm or ammunition». The notice even states that regardless of the status and current legislation regarding cannabis in individual states, federal law takes precedence.

Patients forced into illegality

The NRA (National Rifle Association) hasn't spoken publicly on the subject, but this legislative conflict isn't really in its interest. The association's ex-president, however, told the Washington Times The federal government's refusal to heed the judgment of the states on this issue has created problems for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of gun owners who are forced to either sacrifice their Second Amendment right to bear arms for the opportunity to live pain-free, or risk prosecution and imprisonment.

When someone buys a gun in the USA, they have to fill in a form. Among the questions asked, that of the illicit use of a controlled substance will now pose a problem. The form clearly states that the classification in question is the federal classification. The medical or recreational user is therefore obliged to lie, which exposes him or her to further prosecution, or to waive the right to bear arms.

Kate Bell, General Manager of Marijuana Policy Project, a national organization that is trying to push through reforms to the cannabis law, deplores the effects of the law and states that its organization is working to address these issues on a national level. From a European point of view, however, this is not such bad news. peacemaking effects may be even more effective than previously thought.