Drugs or Guns, or Both?
According to this article, law was passed in Pennsylvania that prohibits the ownership of firearms if the person is a user of marijuana. Many citizens are indignant, saying the law infringes on their 2nd Amendment rights. The government is unsure exactly how to enforce the law without infringing on those rights, especially since medical marijuana is required for some citizens, and they cannot help having to use it. The head of the organization Firearms Owners Against Crime, Kim Stolfer, argues “that people who drink heavily or use potent but legal drugs such as opioids or antidepressants can still own a gun” (Scolforo, n.p.). So why can’t a medical marijuana user own a weapon? The law itself is simple, but the execution is tricky to handle.
The Constitution was written to keep the both the national
…show more content…
This type of law is known as ex post facto laws. The law that Pennsylvania passed declared that people who use marijuana are not permitted to own guns, but a portion of the population of Pennsylvania (as well as the rest of the nation) already uses medical marijuana, as well as guns. They aren’t sure how to enforce the law since using medical marijuana and guns was legal before the law was passed, and the Constitution is supposed to keep this sort of unfair prosecution from occurring.
The article provides a great deal of information on many different situations within the issues and several varying points of view. The article definitely encourages one to research further on the subject, and since