Jump to content
jwilt2008

Owning Firearms And Being A Cpl Holder.

Recommended Posts

like said above, guns dont kill people, people kill people, guns protect people, and I would rather have the choice to protect my self the instant it happens rather than being shot and not having the chance!

 

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK for any Attorney's out there : could you put your firearms in a Trust would that make a difference- could you be a MI MM card and legally own firearms if the guns were put in a Trust ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can fight this subject in court and WIN, I would advise not to have the guns and any plants growing on the same property. Oh and retain Micheal Komorn as your attorney if you do run into any issues, but mum is the word here, don't say shiit to anyone you will be fine.. IMO :)

It's a charge of felony firearm, manditory 2 years in the pen for it.. be prepared for a costly court case.. They (leo) come for the bud, and hang you for the gun.. that's their trump card in court. NEXUS  is the wording they used in my case.. if they can connect the firearm to a crime they will..

 Charges were manufacturing marijuana <-- Felony, and Felony Firearm.. Michael got all the charges dropped and made them look foolish in court, he was worth every penny. The Judge ordered all my property back to me plants and gun at the same time.. I showed my documents and I still have my rights intact even after going through court..

Edited to add: This was several years ago, I would proceed at your own risk, call a lawyer if your concerned! Laws change often

gallery_14200_580_3372979.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question asks if you are using illegal drugs. Since we are legal cardholders in our state it is not a lie. They do not specify "federally" illegal.

 

That's what we like to call legalese, and for 5k you can have a suit and tie get you off most of these hooks. The idea of you losing your right to bear arms over a state permit is crazy, but so are these federal bust's with no case ID's disappearing into the night.

 

 

In the end, it comes down to whether or not you would rather be judged by twelve or carried by six. I'd choose the former, myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's after you use the firearm to save your life that you would have a problem.  Blood draw.

 

There's a 5 year minimum mandatory for possession of firearm during a felony.  If you're not within the letter, it could be trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't look at it as "losing my right to bear arms" when I received my card. I never lied on a federal form, and wouldn't do so now. MJ, guns, raids, property seizures, seem to be with an agenda these days. I'd never want a cross reference of me attempting to defraud the feral government for the purpose of procuring a firearm, while engaged in their pseudo  (ferally) mandated cultivation/distribution jail term/plea sham, so I will not lie. . If a patient or cg feels the need to carry a weapon while engaged as  such, I'd advise some  interviewing process revisions.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://theleafonline.com/c/politics/2014/08/medicate-bear-arms-question/

 

To Medicate or to Bear Arms, That Is the Question

By: Mitchell Colbert

At least that was the case until 2011, when the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms issued a public memo clarifying their views on medical cannabis patients. In the eyes of the ATF, medical cannabis patients are either unlawful users of drugs, or worse, drug addicts, and thus cannot legally own guns. To buy a gun you need to fill out ATF Form 4473, part of which is question 11e which asks if you are an unlawful user of drugs or a drug  addict. The ATF’s memo states that medical cannabis patients need to answer yes to this question, condemning them to give up their second amendment rights… at least as far as guns are concerned, other weapons remain a gray area. It isn’t just buying new guns, any gun previously owned from before one becomes a patient could now be considered an illegal weapon as well.

It’s been three years since the ATF issued the most recent in a series of memos which signed away patient’s rights to own guns without any legislation being passed. So after three years, has anything changed? Recent experiences of cannabis users in the now recreationally legal Washington and reciprocally medical Nevada show that there has been no change in ATF policy.

Colorado based lawyer Brian Vicente, half of the Vicente Sederberg law firm, highlighted the severity of this policy when recently interviewed by The Hemp Connoisseur, “you’re looking at a significant amount of time in prison if you’re found to have a large amount of marijuana and a gun.” If the statement by Vicente wasn’t clear enough the challenge to this ATF policy, Wilson v. Holder, lost in federal court back in March when the 9th district court upheld a motion to dismiss the case. Despite the tidal-wave of medical cannabis legalization sweeping the nation there has been no give whatsoever on the issues of medical cannabis patients right to legally bear arms.

Medical cannabis patients aren’t without friends in Congress, and recently some action was proposed to stop the ATF’s discriminatory policy. en. John Walsh (D-Mont.) has proposed an amendment to a senate budgetary bill that would ban the ATF from using federal funds to discriminate against medical cannabis patients by denying them their second amendment rights. Senator Walsh has good reason for this given the crushing impact federal raids have had on the cannabis industry in Montana. This amendment was just proposed last month and it is still too early to tell its fate. Future developments in the coming months will be reported on here, at The Leaf Online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.

--George Washington

 

The Supreme Court "Decision" is appalling. They degrade themselves and the entire American judicial system with their opinion which amounts to government sanctioned hypocrisy, propaganda and racism.

 

 

The first quote is a "re-weaving" of his words. Below are his actual words from his first Annual Message to Congress:

 

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies."

Edited by YesMichigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything I'm reading, here and elsewhere, appears to be from the perspective of grower/patient combo and not JUST the patient.  What information is available (if any) regarding the patient only? 

The 2.5oz amount would obviously still apply, but you no longer have firearms in a federally illegal grow operation.  Obviously the two don't mix, so you shouldn't CPL while medicated or picking up, but it's much more grey in your home consuming.  Only worry would be a 'bump in the night' where a defensive shooting may occur, but my understanding is that a blood draw will show much reduced levels just hours after the fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

commission of a felony involving this scheduled drug, while in possession of a firearm......growing is just one more felony to tool with is all.

don't commit a felony, don't share your marijuana use with anyone outside your home, and you'll be fine.

 

pistols with laser grips are more accurate to shoot in a stressful event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything I'm reading, here and elsewhere, appears to be from the perspective of grower/patient combo and not JUST the patient.  What information is available (if any) regarding the patient only? 

 

The 2.5oz amount would obviously still apply, but you no longer have firearms in a federally illegal grow operation.  Obviously the two don't mix, so you shouldn't CPL while medicated or picking up, but it's much more grey in your home consuming.  Only worry would be a 'bump in the night' where a defensive shooting may occur, but my understanding is that a blood draw will show much reduced levels just hours after the fact.

 

The US Supreme Court in Rowan V. Holder (referenced above your post) directly stated the following RE: Firearms and ANY Medical Marijuana patient in the United States.

 

For the record: The Opinion is one of the worst and most ill-informed that I can imagine ever reading. Their premises are poor and their conclusion even worse. A truly criminal interpretation of the Constitution and Citizen's rights.

 

 

(this is all from the link in the story I posted above http://reason.com/blog/2014/03/18/challenge-barring-medical-marijuana-lice )

 

Quoting from the opinion (after saying the defendants arguments that the case was moot because Wilson's marijuana card has expired in the years since the case was filed did not hold up), Judge Navarro says Wilson's argument that the ban on drug users owning guns violates the Second Amendment:

 

"fails as a matter of law because the Ninth Circuit has already upheld the constitutionality of § 922(g)(3). United States v. Dugan, 657 F.3d 998, 999–1000 (9th Cir. 2011). In Dugan, based on the Supreme Court’s acknowledgement that the individual right to possess and carry weapons is not unlimited, the Ninth Circuit observed that “[h]abitual drug users, like career criminals and the mentally ill, more likely will have difficulty exercising self-control, particularly when they are under the influence of controlled substances.”.....The court further noted an important distinction between the subsections of § 922 expressly discussed by the Supreme Court in Heller and 922(g)(3): nlike people who have been convicted of a felony or committed to a mental institution and so face a lifetime ban, an unlawful drug user may regain his right to possess a firearm simply by ending his drug abuse. The restriction in § 922(g)(3) is far less onerous than those affecting felons and the mentally ill. 

Dugan, 657 F.3d at 999. Therefore, given this distinction and the danger presented by users of controlled substances, the Ninth Circuit joined the Seventh and Eighth Circuits by broadly holding that “Congress may . . . prohibit illegal drug users from possessing firearms.”

 

Bad precedent makes bad law, and Scalia's all-too-forgiving aside in Heller about the array of gun laws that would still withstand Second Amendment scrutiny claims another right.

Plaintiff first feebly attempts to discredit Dugan by stating that Dugan “is a deeply flawed opinion, lacking any meaningful legal analysis . . ..” However, Dugan remains controlling authority on this Court. Furthermore, this Court lacks the authority to overrule a Ninth Circuit decision. ....In light of Dugan, any amendment of this claim would be futile and, thus, Plaintiff’s Second Amendment challenge to § 922(g)(3) is dismissed with prejudice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, I ended my drug abuse a long time ago. Though I still use MJ for pain.

  Why are people on prozac and methamphetamine and valium and hydrocodone exempt?  Because it's the cops and most of the population?  Great way to disarm america.

 

If congress wants to prohibit it then they should be the ones coming to get them.

Edited by Norby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one person is allowed to be strung out on daily doses of methamphetamines, keep their job, guns, and cars, while another user gets arrested, jailed, loses their rights to possess a firearm or drive ?

 

Many of those older relatives often spoke of their "nerve pills" and their "get up and go pills". I noticed mostly women using tranq's and uppers, more than men when I was young. they had all their teeth by the way, and nary a burned lip.

 

The one that legally acquires his rx medicine of choice seems to be the one who does not lose rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just like a cop? do they have a blood draw after a killing?

I guess that would depend on their union/contract,,,,,but most unions allow blood draws if an accident is involved, I dont know about an incident!

 

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it legal to carry both alcohol and firearms in a car?

 

Considering the prevalence of booze fueled gun tragedies, shouldn't there be a mechanism to unsure no one with access to alcohol can use a gun?

 

Why don't we have medical alcohol given the high incidence of inebriated criminal activity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...