Unregister from MMCC (Medical Cannabis Commission)

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • JoeTheBeagle

    Member
    Aug 19, 2018
    7
    If you voluntarily unregister from the MMCC (Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission) or your MMCC certification is now expired, can you apply and be approved for your HQL & submit the 77r for approval?

    I searched but did not see this question or an answer to it. I’m new forgive me if I missed it.

    Thanks
     
    Last edited:

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    As answered in the other thread, according to someone I know who was affected, the MSP had advised them not to reapply for the HQL or firearms purchases at all for 1 year after cancellation.

    MSP have not offered formal guidance on the matter (unless I’ve mistaken).
     

    Mr. Ed

    This IS my Happy Face
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2009
    7,899
    Edgewater
    As answered in the other thread, according to someone I know who was affected, the MSP had advised them not to reapply for the HQL or firearms purchases at all for 1 year after cancellation.

    MSP have not offered formal guidance on the matter (unless I’ve mistaken).

    Who is a Prohibited person?

    See bullet #3, the MSP is correct.

    Just thinking out loud here, but it might be helpful to provide an independent drug test that proves you were clean on such and such a date, and then again right before you apply. Full disclosure about the circumstances of the prescription, dates of use, etc.
     

    CypherPunk

    Opinions Are My Own
    Apr 6, 2012
    3,907
    I would suggest that you don’t have to use illegal drugs to be prohibited.

    Just having the card or acting as a caregiver by purchasing or administering illegal drugs to a child with epilepsy is enough to prohibit you.

    That said the suggestion of supplying the results of a drug screening test to the MSP seems irrelevant and a really dumb idea.
     

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    MSP considers the mere act of having the card as being ineligible for firearms purchase or the HQL. Don't even have to be a user...
     

    inkd

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 4, 2009
    7,512
    Ridge
    MSP considers the mere act of having the card as being ineligible for firearms purchase or the HQL. Don't even have to be a user...

    Does the State check to see if someone has a Cannabis card at the time of purchase or when applying for an HQL?

    I guess my thought is that if a person cancels/withdraws from the program, why should they have to wait a year to apply for an HQL?

    I know you don't have the answer, I'm just spitballing.
     

    DutchV

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 8, 2012
    4,703
    MSP considers the mere act of having the card as being ineligible for firearms purchase or the HQL. Don't even have to be a user...

    It does seem reasonable to assume that a person who has a card is also a user.
     

    CypherPunk

    Opinions Are My Own
    Apr 6, 2012
    3,907
    It does seem reasonable to assume that a person who has a card is also a user.



    I can think of many reasons someone would have a card and not be a user;
    1. A caregiver for a minor child
    2. Someone recently diagnosed with terminal cancer who wants to get the card before they are unable to physically complete the process due to illness.
    3...
     

    A1Uni

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 28, 2012
    4,842
    I can think of many reasons someone would have a card and not be a user;
    1. A caregiver for a minor child
    2. Someone recently diagnosed with terminal cancer who wants to get the card before they are unable to physically complete the process due to illness.
    3...

    There is a difference between someone with a pot card (get stoned card) and someone, such as a cancer patient or someone with glaucoma who has an actual "prescription" form a real doctor ~not a pot card mill quack~ for marijuana used for legitimate medical treatment.

    One with an actual prescription who obtained the drug form a legitimate pharmacy would not be prohibited, and yes, many pharmacies in MD do dispense legitimate medical marijuana.
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,880
    I can see the moral distinctions you are pointing out , but there isn't a distinction in state or federal law .
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,361
    SoMD / West PA
    There is a difference between someone with a pot card (get stoned card) and someone, such as a cancer patient or someone with glaucoma who has an actual "prescription" form a real doctor ~not a pot card mill quack~ for marijuana used for legitimate medical treatment.

    One with an actual prescription who obtained the drug form a legitimate pharmacy would not be prohibited, and yes, many pharmacies in MD do dispense legitimate medical marijuana.

    Not in the feds eyes
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,361
    SoMD / West PA
    I can see the moral distinctions you are pointing out , but there isn't a distinction in state or federal law .

    Marijuana is still illegal in Maryland. It was never decriminalized, only the penalty was downgraded to a civil citation.

    The medical marijuana, is supposed to be processed to a point, that the recipient does not experience euphoria.
     

    DutchV

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 8, 2012
    4,703
    I can think of many reasons someone would have a card and not be a user;
    1. A caregiver for a minor child
    2. Someone recently diagnosed with terminal cancer who wants to get the card before they are unable to physically complete the process due to illness.
    3...

    This is a small sector of the population who would have to get a lawyer, and file an appeal. It's not the majority of card holders.
     

    Moon

    M-O-O-N, that spells...
    Jan 4, 2013
    2,367
    In Orbit
    I can think of many reasons someone would have a card and not be a user;
    1. A caregiver for a minor child
    2. Someone recently diagnosed with terminal cancer who wants to get the card before they are unable to physically complete the process due to illness.
    3...

    In the eyes of the Federal government, I suppose purchasing marijuana is just as illegal as using it, even though any federal law regarding marijuana is unconstitutional.
     

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    There is a difference between someone with a pot card (get stoned card) and someone, such as a cancer patient or someone with glaucoma who has an actual "prescription" form a real doctor ~not a pot card mill quack~ for marijuana used for legitimate medical treatment.

    One with an actual prescription who obtained the drug form a legitimate pharmacy would not be prohibited, and yes, many pharmacies in MD do dispense legitimate medical marijuana.


    Still a federally prohibiting if using marijuana and not FDA approved synthetic or other derivatives of it for treatment, unfortunately.
    https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/counselor-s-corner/139-medical-marijuana-and-guns

    Medical Marijuana and Guns

    With the recent changes in Maryland law concerning medical marijuana, see MD Code, Health - General, § 13-3304 et seq., and the push to legalize the use of marijuana in Maryland, a recurring issue is how such marijuana use would affect your Second Amendment rights. The short answer is that it may well act to abrogate those rights by (1) barring a FFL from selling a firearm to such a user and (2), by making such a user a prohibited person under federal law.
    1. As to FFLs, the pertinent statutory provision under federal law is 18 U.S.C. 922(d)(3), which provides:
    (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--
    * * *
    (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));
    The ATF has issued a bulletin to all Federal Firearms Licensees that advises FFLs that "if you are aware that the potential transferee is in possession of a card authorizing the possession and use of marijuana under State law, then you have 'reasonable cause to believe' that the person is an unlawful user of a controlled substance." See Open Letter to All Federal Firearms Licensees, Sept. 21, 2011, available at www.atf.gov/file/60211/download. That means that the FFL (or any other person with such knowledge) is prohibited from selling a firearm to such a person with a medical marijuana card. Indeed, both federal form 4473 and state form 77R specifically state that medical marijuana users may not purchase firearms.
    2. As to becoming a disqualified person, a user of marijuana may well be a disqualified person under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3) which states:
    (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.
    A violation of these provisions is a felony. See 18 U.S.C. 924. Both of these provisions define the term "unlawful user" by reference to the Controlled Substances Act, a federal law. A "controlled substance" under federal law specifically includes marijuana as marijuana is specifically classified as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 812(c). See also ATF regulations 27 C.F.R. § 478.11. A user of marijuana is an unlawful user under that federal law. Period. Indeed, while the medical marijuana law of Maryland permits the use of marijuana under the tightly controlled circumstances specified in that law, the mere possession of marijuana in Maryland remains otherwise illegal in any other circumstance. See Robinson v. State, 451 Md. 94 (2017). That is so even though possession of small amounts of marijuana has also been decriminalized in Maryland. See Robinson, 451 Md. at 98 ("Simply put, decriminalization is not synonymous with legalization, and possession of marijuana remains unlawful.").
    3. While the government does not have free rein in what it can illegalize under the Second Amendment (see, e.g., United States v. Chovan, 735 F.3d, 1127 (9th Cir. 2013) (Bea, J. concurring), these provisions have withstood attack in the courts. For example, the Ninth Circuit (a very liberal circuit) has sustained this federal disqualification in the context of medical marijuana users on grounds that "empirical data and legislative determinations support a strong link between drug use and violence. As to the first, studies and surveys relied on in similar cases suggest a significant link between drug use, including marijuana use, and violence. See United States v. Carter, 750 F.3d 462, 466–69 (4th Cir. 2014) (citing and discussing four studies and two government surveys); United States v. Yancey, 621 F.3d 681, 686 (7th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (citing all but one of the studies and surveys in Carter, plus one additional study). " Wilson v. Lynch, 835 F.3d 1083, 1093 (9th Cir. 2016). The court concluded that Congress reached a "reasonable conclusion that the use of such drugs [including marijuana] raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated." Id at 1094. It is certainly within the power of Congress to change federal law, but until it does, marijuana users remain "unlawful users" of a controlled substance under federal law, regardless of whether such use is permitted by state law. Of course, the states would have to change their laws as well, as the classification of "unlawful user" includes both federal and state laws.
    More input from esqappellate in the Sun article here: http://archive.is/62ZZR

    There is some good news for those affected. The FDA has approved Cannabidiol for epilepsy treatment. http://reason.com/blog/2018/06/26/this-is-the-first-fda-approved-medicine

    The President has endorsed legislation that would put marijuana regulations in the hands of the states.

    Their legislation would amend the Controlled Substances Act to make it inapplicable in those states, federal territories, and tribal lands that have passed some form of marijuana legalization. It would also open the financial sector to state-legal cannabusinesses, many of whom are unable to access credit, buy insurance, or even deposit cash in banks
    http://reason.com/blog/2018/06/08/trump-endorses-marijuana-federalism-bill

    It's truly shameful that the use of a plant strips one the legal ability to defend oneself.
     

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    In the eyes of the Federal government, I suppose purchasing marijuana is just as illegal as using it, even though any federal law regarding marijuana is unconstitutional.


    There's a lot of irony there.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,919
    Messages
    7,258,869
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom