According to the Government… The Founding Fathers Were Too Drunk for the 2nd Amendment

About this video

Colion breaks down the Supreme Court case United States v. Rahimi, which challenges federal law prohibiting gun possession by unlawful users of controlled substances. He argues that the government’s position would allow disarmament based purely on categorical status—such as using marijuana a couple times per week—without any individualized proof of dangerousness. Colion highlights Justice Gorsuch’s historical comparison to Founding Fathers who drank regularly, questioning whether the government’s logic would have disarmed them under similar reasoning.

Key takeaways

• Colion explains that the government argues minimal marijuana use (one gummy every other night) could qualify someone for lifetime gun disarmament under current federal law
• Colion points out that the government’s theory relies on congressional judgment and categorical status rather than individualized proof of dangerousness or misuse of firearms
• Colion warns that this case has implications beyond marijuana, as it tests whether Second Amendment rights function as true rights or as conditional privileges that can be revoked based on legislative categories

Episode details: published March 4, 2026 · 4:57 long. Summary written by Self Growth Videos from the episode itself. Colion Noir’s legal commentary reflects his positions and teaching, attributed to him — it is not legal advice. His defensive-incident breakdowns are his analysis of reported incidents, attributed to him.

← Previous: Have Shotguns Finally Caught the AR-15? · Next: Can You Carry After “Just One Drink”? →

All Colion Noir videos · Colion Noir profile · Colion Noir on YouTube