BATFE Declares No Guns for Medical Marijuana Users

[RoyGBiv]

Also, is seems really strange to me that so many folks the believe the Feds should be limited, automatically point to "because the Feds say so" when it comes to medical Marijuana. Isn't the the restriction of this drug or any other really something that should be decided on the state level anyhow?

Pointing to Federal Law is not an admission of concurrence or support for said law, just an acknowledgment that the law exists, is enforceable and will land you in the pokey if you get busted in violation.

State level drug regulation is debatable.... Drugs are quite clearly involved in many issues regulated under Federal authority including but not limited to interstate commerce (a widely abused Federal Power, perhaps the most widely abused)...

The Second Amendment, however, is not.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
States do not have the right to infringe on the Bill of Rights. But what do I know?

[steve817]

To discuss this issue intelligently, it's important to remember this is not a new rule. Users of illegal drugs have been prohibited from purchasing from an FFL as long as I can remember. The ATF letter is not creating new policy or law. It's reminding FFLs of a long standing rule. Federal law also prohibits firearm sales to illegal aliens. That rule applies even in a "sanctuary city" because city rules don't override federal law. If that makes sense to you, then you can see by the same token, state mj laws don't override federal law.

As much as I dislike the ATF I have to say

[The Mad Moderate]

I'm going to do something ageist my better judgement, and admit that I sometime smoke MJ. I have to say that I do agree with this law, as it is currently illegal as far as the law is concerned. If the MJ users medical or otherwise wish to change that they have the power to try and do so. I recently saw an article which said over 100 million Americans have smoked MJ at some point in their life, that is a huge voting block, I don't see it becoming legal anytime soon though but I think it will happen. Having said that while I do smoke I take steps to protect my self as much as I can. I do not carry in the rare event that I have MJ in my car, I will not leave my house if I am under the influence of MJ. I do know it's illegal and am fully aware of the consequences if I am caught, but to me that is what freedom is about, making choices while being fully aware of the consequences. I recently had quote on my sig line from Thomas Jefferson (a admitted MJ user) that said "if a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it is his duty", I do not think of myself as a patriot or martyr for a cause for smoking I simply look at it as a choice I have the freedom to make and the willingness to to deal with the consequences.

[mmestx]

The BATFE letter seems to leave out parts of the actual law. The letter refferences 18 U.S.C. § 922 : US Code - Section 922 g(3). The letter leaves out the part I highlighted:

(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.

So, it would seem that if an MJ user would be legal if they bought ammo and firearm that was not shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

[Jumping Frog]

So, it would seem that if an MJ user would be legal if they bought ammo and firearm that was not shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

Except there have been enough court precedents now messing up the whole "interstate commerce" clause to the point that you growing food on your own land has been redefined as "interstate commerce". Congress seems to think that anything and everything is now "interstate commerce" and they seem to think they have the right to control everything.

[MeMelYup]

I have to disagree with BATFE. There are a lot of drugs that are illegal but become legal with a medical prescription (morphine). Evidently the difference is that MJ is not recognized by the AMA. The AMA doesn't recognize a lot of herbal remedies claiming that there is not enough scientific data.

[Ameer]

I have to disagree with BATFE.

Me too most of the time but this law was passed by Congress.

[speedsix]

...how about those on uppers and downers...prescribed by their Dr? where do they draw THAT line??? will it go as far as if you're using Preparation H...no guns or ammo because you may be "uptight"?????? No guns because you're acting within the law...(though I don't like the law)...this is one I hope the ACLU DOES get involved with...

MJ is ILLIEGAL under current Federal law.
Prescription meds are LEGAL, when used as prescribed.

Intoxication is fairly well defined.
If you're intoxicated using prescription meds (as prescribed), then you should not be carrying, just as you should not be carrying under the influence of alcohol.
Federal law does not recognize MJ as as "prescribable" medication.

Not very difficult, but, a few gray areas.
I don't like it, but, it's not difficult (IMO) to follow the logic.

...so we have another case where the Feds trample on states' rights...a state says it's legal to use prescribed MJ...and the feds say it isn't...that's my point...the Feds draw their power from the people...and ignore what the people vote on...I'm not for MJ use, either...it's the principle of the thing...it's no more incapacitating than a lot of other prescription drugs or alcohol...yet those who use(and abuse) those can still buy a gun...I hate that it's so arbitrary...

[speedsix]

To discuss this issue intelligently, it's important to remember this is not a new rule. Users of illegal drugs have been prohibited from purchasing from an FFL as long as I can remember. The ATF letter is not creating new policy or law. It's reminding FFLs of a long standing rule. Federal law also prohibits firearm sales to illegal aliens. That rule applies even in a "sanctuary city" because city rules don't override federal law. If that makes sense to you, then you can see by the same token, state mj laws don't override federal law.

...but they should...if Calif. voters vote that medically prescribed MJ is legal...then in Calif. it should be legal...if a Calif. resident is not in Calif. when he's found with MJ...and the Feds want to charge him...fine...the point is that no matter what the voters want on the state or local level, the Feds want to trump that...and should not in all cases be able to do it...state laws should, within the borders of that state...be the law in this case...in my old opinionated opinion...whether you find it intelligent or not...


...as a tangent...I wonder what would happen if a Calif resident in possession of a Dr's. RX and found by a Fed with his MJ in his pocket...have there been any test cases??? the ACLU oughta LOVE that one...

[speedsix]

I'm going to do something ageist my better judgement, and admit that I sometime smoke MJ. I have to say that I do agree with this law, as it is currently illegal as far as the law is concerned. If the MJ users medical or otherwise wish to change that they have the power to try and do so. I recently saw an article which said over 100 million Americans have smoked MJ at some point in their life, that is a huge voting block, I don't see it becoming legal anytime soon though but I think it will happen. Having said that while I do smoke I take steps to protect my self as much as I can. I do not carry in the rare event that I have MJ in my car, I will not leave my house if I am under the influence of MJ. I do know it's illegal and am fully aware of the consequences if I am caught, but to me that is what freedom is about, making choices while being fully aware of the consequences. I recently had quote on my sig line from Thomas Jefferson (a admitted MJ user) that said "if a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it is his duty", I do not think of myself as a patriot or martyr for a cause for smoking I simply look at it as a choice I have the freedom to make and the willingness to to deal with the consequences.

...there, now...dontcha feel all better for having confessed?...

[Bullwhip]

"e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?"

CAn't be addicted to MJ, he can answer no. "Are you" means currently, so unless the guy is smoking it right then and there he can answer no. Legal prescrip. medicine is a "controlled substance", lot and lots of people are addicted to those legally. I guess they can't guy guns.

The ATF letter said if the dealer thinks the buyer has a medical MJ card then he can't buy, no matter how he answers the question. I don't know anybody with a card like that but I read some of the people with cards don't sue it, they take care of patients who do.

Feds still give pot to a few people ever month, part of that medical trial they started a long time ago. Those people are legal smokers, they could answer no on the form too.

[speedsix]

...so, unless they brag at the gunstore...and if they read/answer the question carefully, the BATF letter which is contrary to the question that the form asks,( or the Feds somehow submit a list of RX users to the NICS center...)just is a non-issue...

[Jumping Frog]

...so, unless they brag at the gunstore...and if they read/answer the question carefully, the BATF letter which is contrary to the question that the form asks,( or the Feds somehow submit a list of RX users to the NICS center...)just is a non-issue...

The gunstore is probably OK because they didn't know.

Remembering that medical marijuana could be in liberal states with gun registration requirements, the door is now open for the BATFE to cross-reference medical marijuana users with gun registrations and start knocking on people's doors. At 4:00 am in full SWAT gear, of course, those "illegal" gun owners are "dangerous".

[boba]

the point is that no matter what the voters want on the state or local level, the Feds want to trump that...and should not in all cases be able to do it...state laws should, within the borders of that state...be the law in this case...in my old opinionated opinion...whether you find it intelligent or not...

Are you familiar with Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution?

[Liberty]

If marijuana is illegal then only criminals will have marijuana.