Mmma Questions And Open Discussion On Rules :)

[trichcycler]

Any misconceptions may be based on published federal laws concerning marijuana and gun possession. Are you aware of the Federal law that states we cannot possess a gun while using,growing , or selling marijuana? I could copy paste it here for reference to avoid any misconceptions if you like?

 

seems confusing that you say we can legally possess  firearms while possessing marijuana, but the feds say the opposite. what  are we to believe?

[bobandtorey]

Any misconceptions may be based on published federal laws concerning marijuana and gun possession. Are you aware of the Federal law that states we cannot possess a gun while using,growing , or selling marijuana? I could copy paste it here for reference to avoid any misconceptions if you like?

 

seems confusing that you say we can legally possess  firearms while possessing marijuana, but the feds say the opposite. what  are we to believe?

Thank you

 

This is my own opinion i see it all the time in Court when someone has a gun they use it against them and sometimes they will drop the gun charge if they take a plea 

for cannabis possession 

 

But i've also seen people get their guns back and their cannabis back it's a 50/50 imho it is a big deal for some to have a gun and i agree you should be able to have it it is your right 

 

but i wouldn't do it because i know how things could go and it also would cost a lot of $$ for a good Lawyer 

[trichcycler]

I've seen people walk out of court after committing a crime, a result of some deal. I never thought of the original crime charged as " now legal to commit."

I'll start a "new" thread and try to gain more understanding in the matter maybe. Its not a dead horse until people stop getting arrested I think.

[beourbud]

There are all sorts of minor complications in court with firearms and cannabis. Those have little or nothing to do with federal law, and I have never seen a patient convicted of felony firearm. There are several members of this forum that have had firearms returned after a successful result. It is a dead horse, as people are not being arrested for cannabis and firearms, they are being arrested for the cannabis alone, and felony firearm charge is tacked on by the prosecutor as leverage. Any problems in court are not relevant to your legal theory.

 

Right On

 

Zap you need a "like" button

[trichcycler]

I thought "legal" meant on the books, written as, and generally accepted by a court of law, as the law pasted below.  

But, since the Federal government does not recognize our transfer of, transport of, growing of, or possession of marijuana as medical one, it can prosecute for the violation I thought. Whether they have in the past or not, or lost a case even, the law remained on the books for me to paste. alas, my misunderstanding.

Is this a law on the books? would it be a violation of this law to grow, transfer, and possess cannabis this moment, while possessing guns?

 

You stated  "Own and bear are legal", but does that contradict the written law concerning the very same?

18 U.S.C. 922 (d)

It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person

— (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) is a fugitive from justice;

(3) 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));

(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; (5) who, being an alien— (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or (B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26))); (6) who [2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; (8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that— (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and (B) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or (9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

[trichcycler]

from Alaska gov, 2nd amendment right?

http://dps.alaska.gov/statewide/PermitsLicensing/firearmFAQ.aspx

 

"Am I prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition in Alaska due to my using any marijuana?" says card holder

Yes.

says uncle sam

 

and the letter http://www.nssf.org/share/PDF/ATFOpenLetter092111.pdf

 

and this is interesting on the subject

BATFE Bans Medical Marijuana Users From Firearm Possession and Ownership

By BBunker on  in Legal Info

BATFE Bans Firearm Possession By Medical Marijuana Users
In an ATF Open Letter to FFLs, the BATFE has announced that users of medical marijuana are to be excluded from possessing or owning firearms or ammunition. The BATFE uses 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(3) as the authority for this determination. This section prohibits any person who is an “unlawful user or addicted to any controlled substance” from possessing firearms or ammunition.

Responsibility of FFLs
Additionally, 18 U.S.C. Section 922(d)(3), makes it unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable suspicion to believe that such a person is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance.

Those that use medical marijuana, regardless of state law, should answer “yes” to question 11.e on ATF form 4473 and the FFL should NOT transfer the firearm or ammunition to them. Possession of a medical marijuana card is sufficient evidence to an FFL that there is “reasonable cause to believe” the potential transferee is prohibited from firearm and/or ammunition ownership pursuant to the above-referenced sections of federal law.

Constitutional Issues with the BATFE’s Ban
While the BATFE’s proclamation is based in federal law, there are still numerous constitutional flaws associated with this ban. First, there appears to be a Due Process violation of a medical marijuana user’s rights. Ownership and possession of firearms is a fundamental right according to the Second Amendment to the Constitution and case law from the U.S. Supreme Court. Ironically, an individual who uses medical marijuana is not banned from exercising other constitutional rights, including speech, religion, or press.

Second, there is a potential lack of jurisdiction. If the firearm or ammunition is created within the state and then sold to a resident of that state, the federal government has no jurisdiction over the transaction as it does not trigger the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. It seems inevitable that a legal challenge will result from the BATFE’s ban on medical marijuana users owning firearms and ammunition.

[Dr. Bob]

The 'people' cannot be banned from firearm ownership, but 'individuals' can, including classes of individuals like medical marijuana patients.  Here is an article written by attorney Dan Hartman that might be helpful...   http://www.denalihealthcaremi.com/guns-marijuana/

 

As Zap pointed out, the dance between medical marijuana and firearm laws is very complex.  One possible way around it is to get a letter from the local US Attorney to see if they would be willing to prosecute a medical marijuana patient following their state law simply because they owned or used a firearm. I've heard of this being used for CPL's, because I don't think they are interested in prosecuting based on just ownership and a card. 

 

Dan's opinion seems to be you have a right to both, but don't exercise both at the same time.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

This is a letter forbidding ffl holders from selling to people who unlawfully use or are addicted to a controlled substance and is not relevant to those that possess, transfer, grow, etc. Unless they are using while they purchase and the ffl holder decides to sell to them. Then the ffl holder may be in trouble?

 

Are you saying this letter only applies to people that are actually using at the instant they buy a firearm???  Seriously?  So if they aren't intoxicated in the gun store they are fine????

 

Dr. Bob

[Wild Bill]

If it helps any, I was arrested for possession of marijuana before the medical program started.

 

The SWAT team photographed and cataloged my guns, but did not take any of my long guns. They did confiscate an unregistered pistol, but did not charge me with a crime for having it.

 

This was Oakland county, if it had been Federal it might have been another story.

[Dr. Bob]

The letter applies to FFL holders (gun sellers), not the buyers.

 

Anyone that would show up under the influence of marijuana to purchase, register, or get a CPL would probably be disqualified under the 'mentally defective' aspects of the law (only partially said with tongue in cheek) but it says 'user of' not 'intoxicated with'.  I think your argument that as long as you are not actively using at the time of purchase you can do it is rather a reach.  Yes the letter is to FFL holders selling/transferring firearms, but I think if you look at the related sections you will find that there are qualifications for ownership- I don't think they just pulled that out of the air when they wrote the regulations.

 

Dr. Bob

[Restorium2]

Anyone that would show up under the influence of marijuana to purchase, register, or get a CPL would probably be disqualified under the 'mentally defective' aspects of the law (only partially said with tongue in cheek) but it says 'user of' not 'intoxicated with'.  I think your argument that as long as you are not actively using at the time of purchase you can do it is rather a reach.  Yes the letter is to FFL holders selling/transferring firearms, but I think if you look at the related sections you will find that there are qualifications for ownership- I don't think they just pulled that out of the air when they wrote the regulations.

 

Dr. Bob

At some point you are going to have to learn that some of us are not intoxicated at all while we use cannabis. We are perfectly fine making decisions while we medicate. When you start going down one of these rabbit holes compare cannabis to aspirin and see how silly you sound.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Restorium2

[trichcycler]

lying on a federal form for the purpose of obtaining a firearm is probably a substantial federal offense.  but who's scared of that right!

[trichcycler]

  growing, using, selling, transporting marijuana is a federal offense---   True or False ?

Federal prosecutors don't care if one is section 4 compliant-- True or False

possessing a firearm while in the commission of a felony, while using, growing, selling, transporting, or conspiring to do so, is an additional felony charge--  True or False ?

 

these answers may clear up my misunderstanding hopefully.

[Dr. Bob]

I recommend not having an active card at the time you purchase a firearm or get a cpl.  Before fine, after fine, just not the day you sign the paperwork.  

 

I registered a pistol I received as a gift.  On the form it asked me specifically if I had a medical marijuana card.  I questioned why it was there, and why I had to answer it, because that specific question about a MMMA Card was not on the federal form.  The police said because they wanted it on the form due to federal law, they could use their own form, and if I didn't answer, they would deny me for 6 months (and report it to the federal registry). I told them possession of a card was NOT proof I was using cannabis.  They countered by saying their assumption was if I had a card I was using and I didn't even have the option of taking a urine drug test to prove I wasn't.  I could not pick the department I registered with, it had to be where I lived.   I said I didn't have a card and they gave me the registration.  

 

May be overly cautious, but if you don't have a paper trail and an active card you can say you don't have a card.  What you do the next day is up to you.

 

Dr. Bob

[mibrains]

interesting...

 

i changed the title to this thread so we can comfortably continue the discussions at hand.

 

i feel like it is excellent that we are all discussing firearms and cannabis once again..

 

it is for sure one of the coveted "grey areas" of the act..

 

many people have questions pertaining to the appropriate way to address this particular conundrum and i am certain this discussion helps further peoples own intuition on this issue.

[Dr. Bob]

Lol, will citing either let you say 'Yes I have a Card!' and walk out with a registration for the pistol?

[mibrains]

FYI, I think this is false based on what I have seen. Neither DEA agents nor federal prosecutors want anything to do with patients or caregivers that are compliant with section 4.

 

hmmmmm

 

until they are bored..... or they smell blood

[trichcycler]

Zap,

 

It's getting clearer, thank you. If we dump the "card" part, and call it a "user" will your previous posts apply ?

 

If hey can sell to a known caregiver, who "traffics" in a controlled substance, what exactly is the DEA concerned with?

[trichcycler]

thank you, I was feeling bad for the hijack, I hope the op isn't offended by the change, sorry op.

 

I've never seen this concern shut down with facts before, and believe it may be one of the most unspoken concerns of our community. Legal clarity would be golden in the matter.

 

interesting...

 

i changed the title to this thread so we can comfortably continue the discussions at hand.

 

i feel like it is excellent that we are all discussing firearms and cannabis once again..

 

it is for sure one of the coveted "grey areas" of the act..

 

many people have questions pertaining to the appropriate way to address this particular conundrum and i am certain this discussion helps further peoples own intuition on this issue.

Edited April 25, 2014 by grassmatch

[trix]

The letter posted, and the law quoted prior in this thread, directly pertain only to FFL holders, not to the second amendment rights of cardholders. Think some more, and you will realize the truth is in how law enforcement and the courts deal with it. They do not seize the firearms of patients compliant with section 4. They return the firearms of those that are arrested and successfully defend themselves.

 

If you want to buy a firearm, it is best that you not admit to using marijuana, even medical marijuana. Do not show the dealer your card, etc. If you do, this letter, and the law quoted, say that the seller will be violating a law when transferring to you, and instruct the seller not to do it. The letter posted, and the law, say if they know, they can't sell to you. Medical marijuana patient status is confidential, and FFL holders do not have access to the registry. Patients should desire the privacy of this information, and keep it confidential themselves.

 

FFL holders do have access to NICS, and statewide policy per the MSP is to flag people caught with both marijuana and guns as a substance abuser in NICS, regardless of possession of a registry card. This would alert the FFL holder of your status, and prevent them from selling to you.

 

 

Thank you Michael Komorn!.. The court ordered my property be returned..

[mibrains]

 

 

Thank you Micheal Komorn!.. The court ordered my property be returned..

 

 

absolutely frikkin awesome!

 

thank you for the reminder.

Edited April 26, 2014 by mibrains

[trix]

All of my cards/permits were played in court and they still returned my firearm even knowing all my info.

Yes it was a very good day for everyone involved...

[mibrains]

thank you, I was feeling bad for the hijack, I hope the op isn't offended by the change, sorry op.

 

I've never seen this concern shut down with facts before, and believe it may be one of the most unspoken concerns of our community. Legal clarity would be golden in the matter.

 

no worries grass... i am the OP

 

bonus

[mibrains]

All of my cards/permits were played in court and they still returned my firearms even knowing all my info.

 

Like ^

[mibrains]

Like ^

 

Zap...

 

WTF??

 

where is the "like" option for we the staffs posts?

it must be possible to have one right?  please can we check the "settings" page and find out why we the staff of MMMA are not showing the "like" button on our posts?