ATF: Pot Users Can't Legally OWN Firearms Regardless Of State Laws

[JohnnyE]

I was living on St. Maarten in 1995 when Hurricane Luis went through. Strong Cat 4 storm. I would probably have died if I were not sober. We had a stupid bimbo we had to take care of because she was hammered.

Was she hawt?

 

[teratos]

Was she hawt?

Trashy boner.

We were on the 2nd floor. The 3rd floor blew off. We went up and helped a bunch of people into our place while the Marlboro/Smirnoff Princess cried in the corner.

 

[JohnnyE]

Too bad, otherwise you could have provided aid and comfort.

 

[sbmike]

Hypothetical: Person with legally obtained firearms decides to get a medical marijuana licence for whatever is legal in his/her particular state. The person does not buy any additional guns so no 4473 issue because guns were purchased before obtaining the weed license. Person now has the license but does not use it and does not purchase or use weed. Still guilty in the eyes of the ATF? Or conversely, has a weed license but gives it up (and does not purchase or use weed). This is the main reason I have not pursued this even though I have wondered if the sleep and neuropathy claims are true.

 

[outrider58]

Hypothetical: Person with legally obtained firearms decides to get a medical marijuana licence for whatever is legal in his/her particular state. The person does not buy any additional guns so no 4473 issue because guns were purchased before obtaining the weed license. Person now has the license but does not use it and does not purchase or use weed. Still guilty in the eyes of the ATF? Or conversely, has a weed license but gives it up (and does not purchase or use weed). This is the main reason I have not pursued this even though I have wondered if the sleep and neuropathy claims are true.

He could be straw purchasing the weed...

 

[Biggfoot44]

Hypothetical: Person with legally obtained firearms decides to get a medical marijuana licence for whatever is legal in his/her particular state. The person does not buy any additional guns so no 4473 issue because guns were purchased before obtaining the weed license. Person now has the license but does not use it and does not purchase or use weed. Still guilty in the eyes of the ATF? Or conversely, has a weed license but gives it up (and does not purchase or use weed). This is the main reason I have not pursued this even though I have wondered if the sleep and neuropathy claims are true.

Being a Habitual User of Illegal Narcotics makes you Prohibited to *Posses* firearms , not only to purchase .

 

[coinboy]

Hypothetical: Person with legally obtained firearms decides to get a medical marijuana licence for whatever is legal in his/her particular state. The person does not buy any additional guns so no 4473 issue because guns were purchased before obtaining the weed license. Person now has the license but does not use it and does not purchase or use weed. Still guilty in the eyes of the ATF? Or conversely, has a weed license but gives it up (and does not purchase or use weed). This is the main reason I have not pursued this even though I have wondered if the sleep and neuropathy claims are true.

Well, in the hearings for SB1, MSP said they had issued people with pot cards hangun permits. Yet, the people were prohibited from purchase of a regulated weapon or obtaining an HQL if I remember correctly. I believe this was because of how the purchase and HQL language was written.

 

[Doctor_M]

I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding of the regs in MD is if you have a pot license (that feels strange to say or type), you have to surrender it and wait a year before you are allowed to purchase a firearm. I'm not sure where those regulations are promulgated.

 

[remrug]

I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding of the regs in MD is if you have a pot license (that feels strange to say or type), you have to surrender it and wait a year before you are allowed to purchase a firearm. I'm not sure where those regulations are promulgated.

Trying to find what is legal or illegal concerning gun ownership in Md is clear as mud.

Has to be this but cant be that unless this or that is attached or is this length and blah blah blah.
Thank God we arent being infringed upon

 

[Mark75H]

I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding of the regs in MD is if you have a pot license (that feels strange to say or type), you have to surrender it and wait a year before you are allowed to purchase a firearm. I'm not sure where those regulations are promulgated.

Apparently someone at MSP or the AG's office looked at the letter of the law and decided to recind that policy. Permits are now granted to MM card holders, but don't perjure yourself on the 77r or 4473.

 

[gamer_jim]

When you fill out the form. You say you are not a drunkard, you do not smoke pot. If you admit to either, or if proven you lose your rite. At the limit of the document you signed for your purchase permit. By that yes you are prohibited to purchase that gun.

Not EVERY day.

 

[TexDefender]

Federal law trumps the state law. Republicans would be wise to legalize the use of cannabis, tax the crap of it. This would pull more individuals to the right.

 

[davela]

I had my MMJ card for a while, despite owning some guns. When I bought my last few I turned my card in, bought the guns, and then went back on it. I was under the impression that I could not purchase and unaware that I could not own them either. Upon discovering this I immediately turned my card back in.

I had the card because I have nerve damage, ****** vertebrae in every level of my spine, a bad hip, and a bad ankle from an accident I was in 6 years ago. Several surgeries/procedures later, I’m 39 years old and in constant, relentless pain. It’s insane to me that I was allowed to be on pain pills and muscle relaxers, but eating an edible at night to help sleep somehow makes me a danger to society.

 

[teratos]

Federal law trumps the state law.

That is not what the Framers intended…

 

[traveller]

That is not what the Framers intended…

They wrote it right into the constitution.

 

[Mark75H]

That is not what the Framers intended…

It had to, that's why The Articles of Confederation failed

 

[Brychan]

The older I get the funnier it seems that only generally good people try to stay with in the laws. The government at all levels decide what laws they will follow, criminals and politicians what laws they can get away with ignoring. That is why city prosecutors will allow some laws not to be prosecuted, sanctuary cities and/or states. States allowing and even taxing what is federally illegal. Truly a sad state of affairs all around of which we are stuck in the middle. Seems many of the younger generations see this and have decided just to say screw it. Can't really say I blame them, sometimes I just feel like a chump for striving to play the game of life by the rules.

 

[teratos]

They wrote it right into the constitution.

The only powers delegated to the Feds are written into the Constitution. Other powers are reserved for the States or The People. I must have missed the part about cannibis in COTUS. This would be akin to the reason Roe v Wade was overturned. The only thing about firearms in COTUS says something about “shall not be infringed”. Unless I missed something…

 

[River02]

The older I get the funnier it seems that only generally good people try to stay with in the laws. The government at all levels decide what laws they will follow, criminals and politicians what laws they can get away with ignoring. That is why city prosecutors will allow some laws not to be prosecuted, sanctuary cities and/or states. States allowing and even taxing what is federally illegal. Truly a sad state of affairs all around of which we are stuck in the middle. Seems many of the younger generations see this and have decided just to say screw it. Can't really say I blame them, sometimes I just feel like a chump for striving to play the game of life by the rules.

I'm right there with you sir... it is wholly maddening and thouroughly disconcerting.

 

[River02]

Federal law trumps the state law. Republicans would be wise to legalize the use of cannabis, tax the crap of it. This would pull more individuals to the right.

I'd like to believe that but the mainstream media and educational institutions would find a way to spin that into a Democrat initiative and win-- change my mind.