Ammo For Sale

« « Pick one | Home | Deal Alert » »

Guns and weed

Richard Feldman has started himself a new pro gun group called the Independent Firearm Owners Association. Over at the Daily Kos, he says one issue is the drug war and let’s legalize weed:

In our zeal to put violent criminals out of business we’ve corrupted our law enforcement community with lure of asset forfeitures, giving rise to financial incentives to bust people after they sell the drugs so they can seize cash and property. Before asset forfeiture laws, standard procedure had been to simply destroy the drugs! This is perverted capitalism in an Orwellian form. Our founding fathers would collectively vomit if they saw what we’ve created in the very name of protecting our sacred individual civil liberty, freedom and personal actions.

I think that’s correct but, given that it’s Richard Feldman, I have my doubts about the group’s pro-gun credibility. I’m guessing it’s just in time to give Obama a fake pro-gun endorsement. What say you?

22 Responses to “Guns and weed”

  1. Rivrdog Says:

    Before the Pauloons got some semi-creds, I would have said your suspicion was right-on, but now, I don’t know. The embracing of drug legalization has become one of the most prominent tenets of the Ells, maybe the MOST prominent.

    Given the facts of the drug cartels running Mexico just one step away from our southern border, the hegemony of drug legalization is as bad an idea as ever.

    Far from it’s stated objectives of getting the criminals OUT of the drug biz, legalization will actually just invite them IN, and soon, we will have the cartels just a phone call away from our Governors.

    In case you think that’s a wild view, look at history, and note that in both Illinois and Oregon, criminals ran the Legislature in the past. Al Capone ran Illinois’ back in the 1930s and the KKK ran Oregon’s in the late 1920s.

  2. AZ Fortune Cookie Says:

    I don’t know why it would do any good to give Obama any kind of endorsement for pro-gun or pro-legalization, as he refuses to discuss either.

    I’d like to think that the violent tactics that the drug cartels use would continue to be illegal if they legalized marijuana use here in the states. Not to mention, if it was done properly everybody could grow their own, and retain their RKBA.

    That being said, I wonder what stops the cartels from being able to phone our governors, and give money to corrupt politicians now?

  3. Alan Says:

    AZ: Who says they aren’t?

    It would certainly explain why the war on drugs continues despite decades of complete failure.

  4. Classical Liberal Says:

    RivrDog so you are saying after prohibition ended all the criminals and gangsters took over the alcohol industry? I haven’t really seen any evidence of that. I think if we ended drug prohibition probably the big alcohol companies would get into the space and produce the drugs as it is a competitor to their offerings. (Which that with the price drop would put the cartels out of the drug business and they would have to find a different way to make money (like the Mafia had to after prohibition).

  5. AZ Fortune Cookie Says:

    @Alan: exactly. The cartels profit from drugs being illegal, and it would be in their best interest to support the war on drugs.

  6. Rivrdog Says:

    No, the cartels wouldn’t be put out of competition by a price war. They can afford loss-leader sales while they get their terror tactics going againt the competition, whoever it turns out to be.

    The lessons to take from the history of Prohibition are not about the futility of legislating morality, they are about the terror tactics involved, but few realize that.

  7. Richard Feldman Says:

    See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-feldman/gun-rights-marijuana-refo_b_1014802.html

    Happy to answer any questions.
    R Feldman
    IFoA

  8. Greg Says:

    After checking out their stance on the issues, I can’t find anything that I disagree with, you may find something objectionable but I can’t fault their stances on the issues. In my book, any organization that wants to join the dialog and help folks from tyrannical jurisdictions regain their God given rights is a good thing.

    The drug war has been lost and Americans have chosen and they have chosen to be able to smoke what they want. Weed should be and will be legal eventually. Americans realize that pot is here to stay and many enjoy using it for fun or to combat pain.

  9. Jacob Says:

    I’ll reiterate what I posted to Richie’s original HuffPo article that gun groups do need to get away from the drug law enforcement business. It’s harmful to 2A rights.

  10. Lyle Says:

    If it comes from a leftist, it’s fake. QED.

  11. Rick Says:

    American Hunters and Shooters Association with a new logo?

  12. Richard Feldman Says:

    No, not AHSA, no Rosenthal, no Bloomberg and no Schonke. Have any real questions or just more innuendo? We’re not beholden to anyone, here is our mission http://www.independentfirearmowners.org/about-us
    If we don’t hold true to what we say call us out.
    If we do back off – apology accepted in advance!
    R Feldman

  13. Jerry Says:

    Mr. Feldman. I’m sorry, U must be an idiot.

  14. Thane Eichenauer Says:

    “true advances in liberty will never happen until the gun folk and the dope folk quit the fussin’ and the fightin’”

    http://www.gunsandweed.com/

  15. mikee Says:

    So a drug legalization effort is spouting libertarian political sayings, and is trying to tie their marijuana legalization efforts to pro-gun ideology.

    Maybe we can get a cartel boss to write a strong endorsement of their position on drugs and guns, tying the two even closer together in the public mind.

    Maybe the Fast & Furious fiasco can be presented as a pro-drug-legalization effort. After all, it involved drug cartels and guns!

    Maybe these folks can come back after the elections, instead of now, because all I see them doing is conflating bad drugs and bad guns in the public mind, as two bad things that go really, really bad together.

  16. Kristopher Says:

    Conflating the Second Amendment with something as controversial as drug legalization is not helpful in the least.

    If you want to be a libertartian, fine. But the drug issue is not the one WE are working on here.

  17. NAME REDACTED Says:

    “Given the facts of the drug cartels running Mexico just one step away from our southern border, the hegemony of drug legalization is as bad an idea as ever.”

    This is the opposite of true. To take a similar example: the mob got out of the liquor business as soon as prohibition ended.

  18. dustydog Says:

    The answer is bioresearch. America spends billions each year on NIH, on USDA. Have the whiz kids make bugs to target the source plants for heroin and cocaine. Science fiction movies aside, safe and effective viruses can be made, if we had the political will.

    Get rid of the heroin, and the funding for terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan is gone.

    Get rid of cocaine, and the Columbian gangs are gutted.

    After that, the leap to legalizing less addictive drugs like marijuana could be on the table.

  19. A Critic Says:

    @Kristopher

    The real issue is liberty. If you prefer to ignore the real issue and instead beg for special privileges then you are part of the problem.

    I don’t smoke crack – but I’ll fight to the death to defend those who do.

  20. Tarrou Says:

    Perhaps Mr. Feldman can clarify this bit of diplo-speak. From his organization’s “issues” re. Gun shows.
    “IFoA believes that all sellers at gun shows should be on a level playing field and the purchase of firearms should be as effortless and swift as at any retail establishment.”

    Am I wrong in reading that as supporting the criminalization of private sales without background checks?

  21. Kristopher Says:

    A Critic:

    Seriously? You are ready to join a drug gang and lend them your sword in their fight to distribute drugs?

    A little less hyperbole, please.

    Yes, drugs are a liberty issue … but making a big freaking deal about it is like arguing about what color to paint the walls while some arsonist is burning down the house.

    I suggest dealing with the arsonist first, by protecting the Bill of Rights from assault.

  22. Richard Feldman Says:

    Tarrou:

    David Codrea asked me the identical question. Here was my response:

    Thanks for asking the question. Outside of gunshows we oppose NICS checks for transfers between private sellers. At gunshows we support NRA’s position as outlined by Wayne LaPierre as he stated before Congress;

    “We think it’s reasonable to provide for instant checks at gun shows just like at gun stores and pawn shops ” – US House Subcommittee on Crime May 27, 1999.

    In addition we believe that sellers at gunshows should enjoy the same protection from liability that that the firearm industry enjoys under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act giving further encouragement to and additional protection for gun shows, buyers and sellers.

    Best regards,

    Richard

    Richard Feldman, Esq.
    President Independent Firearm Owners Association, Inc.
    http://www.IFoAusa.org
    http://www.facebook.com/IFoA.org
    http://twitter.com/#!/IFOAUSA