Mediaboss Marketing

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KNWA) - Your right to bear arms in Arkansas could be taken away if you apply for a medical marijuana card. According to the Arkansas Department of Health, you can't have both a medical marijuana card and legally own a gun because pot is still illegal on the federal level.

Robert Reed, a Navy Veteran who served his country for 16 year, suffers PTSD along medical conditions which medical marijuana would help.

Reed said, "I will not apply for a med license, and risk my livelihood and my safety."

The Arkansas Department of Health said a question they get all the time is whether or not you can own a gun and possess a medical marijuana ID card. Since prescription pot is a Schedule 1 controlled substance, under federal law, you can't own a gun legally. And federal law supersedes state law.

"If they're a user of marijuana, although legal in Arkansas, it's still illegal on the federal level," explained Robert Brech with Arkansas Department of Health. "It's very clear you cannot be a marijuana user, and pass that check."

Reed, and other veterans who fought for Constitutional rights, will not apply for their medical marijuana cards due to putting the freedom they fought for at risk.

"You've got a law that outlaws the people that defended your right to make a law that puts me in jail," said Reed.

"You won't be denied the medical marijuana card. There's actually a provision in the Constitutional amendment that you can't be denied a license. So they may continue to give a conceal carry license to someone. It's really a problem at the federal level, not the state level," explained Brech.

"How can I have health and freedom by giving up a right? I can't," said Reed.

Read more from the original source:
Medical Marijuana Means Losing Your Second Amendment Right - KARK

The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the Bill of Rights.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

See the article here:
Second Amendment rights - The Constitution

Fairfax, Va. A group of Maryland citizens, with the support of the National Rifle Association, filed a petition to the United States Supreme Court on Friday seeking to reverse aCourt of Appealsrulingthat stripped some of Americas most popular rifles of Second Amendment protection.The 4thCircuit ruling in the case Kolbe v. Hogan is a direct contradiction of the Supreme Courts 2008 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, which re-affirmed American citizens right to self-defense.

Lower courts have been making up their own rules when it comes to the Second Amendment for too long, andtheKolbe decisioncrossed yet another line, said Chris W. Cox, executive director, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action. The Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. The popular rifles and standard magazines banned in Maryland are some of the best tools for self-defense. We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will reverse this egregious decision.

InFebruary, the4thCircuit Court of Appeals ruled the Second Amendment does not protect the most popular rifles in the country including AR-15s as well as all standard capacity detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

The petition asks the Supreme Court to confirm that its ruling inDistrict of Columbia v. Hellerprotects the most popular semiautomatic rifles and magazines.

By holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to common firearms and magazines, the4thCircuit has gone further than any other courtinattackingSecond Amendment freedoms.

Marylands ban on commonly owned rifles and magazines is unconstitutional.The National Rifle Association will continue to fight for all Americans Second Amendment rights.

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America's oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook and Twitter @NRA.

Read more from the original source:
NRA-ILA | Supreme Court Asked to Review Maryland's Gun Ban - NRA ILA

NORTHWEST ARKANSAS - Your right to bear arms in Arkansas could be taken away if you apply for a medical marijuana card. According to the Arkansas Department of Health, you can't have both a medical marijuana card and legally own a gun because pot is still illegal on the federal level.

Robert Reed, a Navy Veteran who served his country for 16 year, suffers PTSD along medical conditions which medical marijuana would help.

Reed said, "I will not apply for a med license, and risk my livelihood and my safety."

The Arkansas Department of Health said a question they get all the time is whether or not you can own a gun and possess a medical marijuana ID card. Since prescription pot is a Schedule 1 controlled substance, under federal law, you can't own a gun legally. And federal law supersedes state law.

"If they're a user of marijuana, although legal in Arkansas, it's still illegal on the federal level," explained Robert Brech with Arkansas Department of Health. "It's very clear you cannot be a marijuana user, and pass that check."

Reed, and other veterans who fought for Constitutional rights, will not apply for their medical marijuana cards due to putting the freedom they fought for at risk.

"You've got a law that outlaws the people that defended your right to make a law that puts me in jail," said Reed.

"You won't be denied the medical marijuana card. There's actually a provision in the Constitutional amendment that you can't be denied a license. So they may continue to give a conceal carry license to someone. It's really a problem at the federal level, not the state level," explained Brech.

"How can I have health and freedom by giving up a right? I can't," said Reed.

See more here:
Medical Marijuana means Losing Your Second Amendment Rights - KNWA

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Liberals may simply try to wish away the crime but a 17-year-old girls brush with death, and subsequent use of a gun, shows without a doubt that the Second Amendment saves.

The story of Kimber Woods, who fired into the ground and scared away a home intruder, is one for the political books. Strangely, liberals are pretty silent on it, though.

Woods was alerted by her boyfriend of a possible burglar, called her dad to ask if she could use a gun, and when told yes, slid one under her pillow. When the burglar did indeed enter her home, Woods pulled out the firearm and pointing it right at his face, demanding he leave. For extra emphasis, she ran outside and fired a shot into the ground.

The burglar fled. Mission accomplished.

Nobody was even physically harmed.

This is how the Second Amendment works.

I know how to use the gun and it gave me a peace of mind that I had the upper hand and I was going to be safe, Woodstold Breitbart in an interview.

So why isnt Woods being lauded throughout the mainstream media as a hero? Why isnt she being mentioned by, say, left-leaning politicos on CNN as a solid example of why the Second Amendment is needed in modern times?

Because Woods doesnt fit the narrative of the gun-controlling left.

Woods experience demonstrates aptly why more guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans, not fewer, bring safety to citizens, particularly for women. Guns are equalizers. Theyre what give a 17-year-old girl the ability to stand down a threatening, perhaps brutal, home intruder, no matter his size, no matter his strength.

Firearms training among Americas youth as Woods underwent, from about the age of 6 or 7, she said is actually a proper lesson plan for parents to follow. The left will cover its ears and eyes at such a notion. But Woods story shows clearly: The constitutional right to carry is indeed a lifesaver for the innocent.

Read the original:
Girl with gun makes clear 2nd Amendment saves - Washington Times