|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 25, 2009, 04:26 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 8,295
|
Firearms possession and Med Pot
Sometimes life offers choices."I can have A or B,but not A+B"
With the new Fed policy on non-enforcement relative to medical marijuana,I suggest it may be true that if one documents oneself as a medpot user or supplier,it would be a bad idea to be caught owning or purchasing a firearm. I recall the place where I sign that says "I am not a user of or addicted to...." when I buy a firearm. I don't use pot. I do not intend this thread to be a forum on pot or medpot.Inappropriate here. My purpose is to point out that people who choose to document themselves as a user should consider the implications,and realize they may be choosing to give up their 2A right by the choice they make |
October 25, 2009, 04:39 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Posts: 274
|
I believe that California does not permit firearms ownership to those using medical marijuana.
|
October 25, 2009, 04:49 PM | #3 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 5, 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 81
|
Medical Marijuana laws exempt you from that, like getting caught with a registered gun and some prescribed Oxicontin, you see.... if you can have a 40oz. and a shotgun in a car, why not 4:20? Oh yeah, there is a law known as "HIPPA (health information privacy protection act) so when you fill out the gun paper work, "do you use drugs" marijuana is an erb, a plant, classified under natural remedy. Ask a lawyer, all marijuana shop owners have guns in their store, a few months back a shop got robbed, and the owner came out shooting, got back the medicine and no charges were filed, cause cops hate criminals more than weed users. The law has limits, if you use marijuana and own a gun, it's the same (even worst) to be under alcohol or prescribe pills, (that make people cookoo). It's ok to own guns and be a 4:20 patient, How do i know, lets say i have taken the step to see "what happens" and "do something" 2 years later, i'm still ok.
|
October 25, 2009, 05:08 PM | #4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Safety, Personal Protection, Range Safety Officer NRA Life Member |
|
October 25, 2009, 05:21 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 3,105
|
Several of you are forgetting that LAWFUL drug use is allowed. Whether it's nicotine, caffeine or alcohol all are legal to use. Obviously, their misuse (drunk driving for example) is unlawful.
While some states have decriminialized medical use of marijuana, it REMAINS illegal under FEDERAL LAW. While Obamas Justice Department says they aren't going to pursue those using "medical marijuana" they COULD- because it's illegal. Question 11e on Form 4473 asks: Quote:
Get caught lying on a Form 4473 gets you up to 10 years imprisonment and/or up to a $250,000 fine. .
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers) Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE Last edited by dogtown tom; October 25, 2009 at 05:33 PM. |
|
October 25, 2009, 05:40 PM | #6 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
From a legal standpoint, just because it is legalized under STATE law; doesn't make it legal under FEDERAL law and it might well effect other FEDERAL laws concerning illegal drug use - like firearms possession.
Also, like many federal laws, trying to be evasive or less than truthful usually lands you with worse charges than telling the truth would have. |
October 25, 2009, 06:54 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
|
As previously pointed out by Bartholomew Roberts and dogtown tom state legalization does not do away with federal law and violations of federal law.
See question 11(e) of Form 4473 below: I believe that for knowingly making any false statement or representation on Federal Form 4473, the penalty is 10 years.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." Frederic Bastiat |
October 25, 2009, 07:53 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
18 USC 922
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person— (3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. If you use or are addicted to a controlled substance, as defined by federal law you are prohibited from owning a firearm. Since federal law doesn't recognize medical marijuana being a medical marijuana user and in possession of a firearm would place you in violation of federal law. While the current justice department says they won't go after medical marijauna users have they made any similar statement about not going after marijauna users who possess firearms. Right or wrong that is the law. If you choose to violate it you do so at your own risk. |
October 26, 2009, 07:06 AM | #9 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2002
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
October 26, 2009, 08:15 AM | #10 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
The problem, of course, is that even Madison knew what might happen.
Quote:
Therefore, if you are a lawful medical marijuana user, in your State, you may not purchase or possess firearms under current Federal Law. |
|
October 26, 2009, 11:20 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2007
Location: Central Kentucky
Posts: 154
|
Wow! All I can say is wow.
__________________
Finem Respice Consider the end Principils Obsta Resist the beginings |
October 26, 2009, 02:30 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 8,295
|
I am the OP
When I made this post,I had no intent to make any comment on what choices a person should make. My only intent was that folks should consider the implications if applicable,as in,it might be like getting a tattoo and changing your mind later.Oops. For myself,I prefer not to bet my liberty on discretionary enforcement.That can change faster than mountain weather,and in the end,the law as written will matter if you have the cuffs on. We get to make choices. It does seem,from the replies,some folks have learned something |
October 26, 2009, 03:53 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Posts: 1,086
|
it specifically says "...unlawful use, or addicted...," isn't medical marijuana use legal? Making it a null and void point to discuss the legality of being a MM user and owning a gun? You're not falsifying documentation on the form if you check no and you are an MM user, as you are lawfully using it as medicine.
__________________
-liberal gun nut = exception to the rule- -1.24274238 miles, because Russians don't need scopes- -Gun control was the Klan's favorite law, how can you advocate a set of laws designed to allow the denigration of a people?- |
October 26, 2009, 04:37 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Safety, Personal Protection, Range Safety Officer NRA Life Member |
|
October 26, 2009, 05:27 PM | #15 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,060
|
Quote:
Heck, I'd rather shoot with a guy smoking a joint a day for glaucoma than a guy consuming a regular cocktail of Xanax, Percocet and Adderall. Another option might be a 10th Amendment suit in one of the states with the Firearms Freedom Act. Such states are already considering certain federal gun regulations as infringements on their powers, and this is simply another of those.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
October 26, 2009, 05:37 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2009
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 811
|
10-4 that Tom
I have been on some pain medication myself before that I would not even have considered firing any of my guns.
I know a couple of folks on Rx's that do not need to be near firearms. But, as you say cannibis used as a medicine in proper doses would present no threat to me by someone else. However, alcohol and gunpowder never mixes well.
__________________
sailing ... A way to spend lots of money and go real S L O W |
October 26, 2009, 05:38 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Posts: 1,086
|
I'm actually not seeing how it's illegal federally but legal in certain states, but it's still illegal usage if you're using it legally in that state. You see what I'm saying? If I am legally using marijuana for medical purposes in... whatever states it's legal in right now, I'm not breaking any laws. But, if I fill out an FFL form, then it's magically illegal? I just don't get it.
__________________
-liberal gun nut = exception to the rule- -1.24274238 miles, because Russians don't need scopes- -Gun control was the Klan's favorite law, how can you advocate a set of laws designed to allow the denigration of a people?- |
October 26, 2009, 06:12 PM | #18 | |||
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,060
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|||
October 26, 2009, 07:12 PM | #19 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,475
|
Quote:
Under federal law, marijuana is a controlled substance, and possession violates federal law. The Constitution says: "...This Constitution, and the laws of the United States ...shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding...." (Article VI) |
|
October 26, 2009, 07:18 PM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 3,105
|
Quote:
What may be legal under your state law doesn't exempt you from Federal law. http://norml.org/index.cfm?wtm_view=&Group_ID=4575 .
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers) Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE |
|
October 26, 2009, 07:26 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Posts: 1,086
|
but if something's illegal under federal law, how can it be legal under state laws? That makes little/no sense to me. If it's illegal nationwide, how can it be exempt in certain jurisdictions? It sounds EXACTLY like the 2nd amendment to me, only opposite. How can handguns and firearms be illegal and banned in certain jurisdiction, but it's unconstitutional to do so? This whole discussion makes me glad I'm not pre-law.
edit: or does it have to do with possession and usage across state lines? Isn't it a state legal issue when it's in a single state, but once the MM has crossed state lines, then it's an issue of federal possession?
__________________
-liberal gun nut = exception to the rule- -1.24274238 miles, because Russians don't need scopes- -Gun control was the Klan's favorite law, how can you advocate a set of laws designed to allow the denigration of a people?- |
October 26, 2009, 07:39 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 23, 2009
Posts: 440
|
I am a chronic pain patient, with severe back and leg pain from injuries sustained in a serious car accident (multiple rollover and crash into a tree at highway (70+ mph) speeds). I am legally prescribed, and take daily, opioid painkillers to properly manage and control my pain. They are only one aspect of a multifaceted pain management regimen but are the only thing relevant to the topic.
Some people are astonished that I am legally able to drive, let alone own and use firearms, because of ignorance or misconceptions about pain management and the appropriate use of opioids. I have been prescribed and taken opioids daily for several years, and have developed tolerance from the side effects. My reaction time, level of consciousness, mental 'clarityi', etc. is in no way negatively affected by the medications I am prescribed. While it is not required, I have paid for reaction time tests that show that I am not impaired by my medication. My lawyer also has depositions on record from both my primary care physician and my pain management specialist that state that they have examined me, have agreed on the treatment plan (including the opioid medication), and that I am tolerant to the side effects of my medications and that no restrictions on driving or operating machinery are necessary. When I started getting into shooting, I consulted my lawyer, who obtained updated depositions from my doctors to specifically add that no restrictions on owning or using firearms are necessary. DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer and am in no way authorized to give legal advice. While my situation is a bit different because opioids can be legally prescribed by a doctor in any state and they are not 'Schedule I' (illegal to use or possess) controlled substances under federal law, I would suggest that anyone who owns firearms and uses medical marijuana in a state where it is legalized to consult with an attorney and obtain similar declarations from your doctor(s) as to whether your level of consciousness, reaction time, mental 'clarity', etc. is or is not affected. |
October 26, 2009, 07:55 PM | #23 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,475
|
Quote:
There is nothing in general preventing a state from making something legal which is illegal under federal law. The net effect is that you won't get arrested by the city police or county sheriff, and you won't be tried in a state court and you won't go to state prison. Instead, you'll be arrested by the FBI or DEA, tried in federal court and sent to a federal prison. Quote:
|
||
October 26, 2009, 07:59 PM | #24 |
Junior member
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
|
What about anti-depressants? I think most of the country is on them. I wondered if they would take away their gun rights?
|
October 26, 2009, 08:01 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Posts: 1,086
|
but how could the DEA or FBI arrest someone for having something federally illegal that's legal in the state, it's not their jurisdiction until it crosses state lines, I thought.
__________________
-liberal gun nut = exception to the rule- -1.24274238 miles, because Russians don't need scopes- -Gun control was the Klan's favorite law, how can you advocate a set of laws designed to allow the denigration of a people?- |
|
|