Transcript of the above video:

Wow the title of this must look really odd! Guns and Ganja, two great tastes that taste great together. I always kind of love that from the '80s, that was the byline on some kind of advertisement that had been etched into my brain from watching too much TV before 1990 rolled around. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article on ZeroHedge, this news came out in various other platforms but I found it first on ZeroHedge. I like to go ahead and cite where I found information first, I found it on Zero Hedge. I happen to like ZeroHedge. I have been burned in comments by trolls saying: "oh you cited ZeroHedge" as if that is something bad. I don't understand that but I find news on ZeroHedge all the time. Again this is from zerohedge.com, the article is titled: US Ban On Pot Users Owning Guns Ruled Unconstitutional. There is a lot of information in this article and there is a lot of other information out there about the underlying case and things. I urge those who are curious about these things to go ahead and check out those articles for yourself including from ZeroHedge. Quoting directly: "A Federal Law barring marijuana users from owning and possessing firearms has been ruled unconstitutional. In a 54-page ruling in favor of Jared Harrison handed down Friday in Oklahoma, U.S. District Judge Patrick Wyrick said the Government cannot claim that Harrison's "mere status as a user of marijuana justifies stripping him of his fundamental right to possess a firearm." Quoting further, there is some further analysis in there and again I urge folks to read this article in detail, quote: "That case established a test that Judges across the country must now apply when evaluating gun control laws. Such laws must be "consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm ownership." And that language is very important. That is a prior case that dealt with Second Amendment issues and in that it said that any laws made must be "consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm ownership." I will get back to that in a moment. Quoting further: "the mere use of marijuana carries none of the characteristics that the nation's history and tradition of firearms regulation supports," wrote Wyrick. Further, "the United States has not identified a single historical law that is "distinctly similar" to the one barring marijuana users from possessing firearms." This was a really fascinating case.

The reason it hit my radar as obviously we have been talking a lot and dealing with a lot, dealing with the legalization and everything associated with now the regulation of Cannabis here in Thailand. As folks are probably aware from watching this channel, I am a real kind of Constitution nerd when it comes to the United States; I really love Constitutional Law, I love that kind of jurisprudence. This was something that pertained to the Second Amendment and it was always something that kind of bugged me. One of the things that I thought was really interesting here is again quote: "consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm ownership." Now I am not going to go too far out on a limb here because I am kind of quoting this from my memory and from anecdotal evidence but it is my understanding like the Constitution is actually printed on hemp paper; I believe that's true and if that is not, I am happy to stand corrected in the comments below but I believe if I am not mistaken, I remember when I went and saw it in person and it was mentioned, "no that is parchment, it was made from hemp." It is also my understanding that quite a number of the founding fathers of the United States grew hemp and grew cannabis and these products. Now I don't know regarding personal usage or how any of that worked, but long story short Marijuana, Cannabis whatever, is not something that popped up in the 21st century. This is something that goes all the way back. It was a commodity, it was a plant; it was around at the beginning of the Republic and so the notion that the founders were sort of unaware of this plant out there that had these effects, when they were writing up or drafting up the Second Amendment, that seems pretty ludicrous and I think the Courts have kind of thrown out that whole or at least this particular Judge has thrown out and they mentioned in that article that it looks like the Government is going to appeal. What a shock! They always seem to appeal when they lose which is always kind of one of those inherent advantages of the Government which they have unlimited resources to appeal whereas the individual, they have to deal with those matters out of their own pocket presumably.

So again and not to get too far off on a tangent there, but long story short, this was a really interesting ruling and a really interesting case and it just kind of tickled the fancy of various aspects of things I have been interested in legally speaking for the past few months so I thought I would go ahead and make a video on it. We will certainly keep you updated on this channel as the situation evolves.