Log in

View Full Version : Federal agency makes it clear: Even legal marijuana users can’t buy guns



EE_
1st January 2018, 11:38 AM
Federal agency makes it clear: Even legal marijuana users can’t buy guns
The ATF raises concerns about Second Amendment rights with a warning that pot is illegal under federal law and users of the drug, even in states where it is legal, can't buy guns.
Updated September 13, 2017
BY GILLIAN GRAHAMSTAFF WRITER

The federal government is stepping up its efforts to keep guns out of the hands marijuana users, even as legal use of the drug is spreading around the country.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives long has prohibited gun and ammunition sales to unlawful users of marijuana, citing a risk of “irrational or unpredictable behavior.” Now, the federal agency has added a warning to Form 4473 making it clear to anyone applying for a permit to buy a gun that marijuana remains illegal under federal law and using it means you cannot buy a gun, despite laws in Maine and a growing number of other states that allow medical and recreational use of the drug.

David Boyer, who managed the campaign to legalize recreational marijuana in Maine, said the ATF's warning about gun purchases "is putting a lot of people in an uncomfortable position."

Language added last week to Form 4473, filled out by gun buyers nationwide, steps up federal efforts to keep guns out of the hands of marijuana users, even as legal use of the drug spreads.
ATF FORM 4473

The new language, added last week to forms filled out by gun buyers in Maine and nationwide, has raised concerns that the government is unfairly denying cannabis users their Second Amendment right to bear arms. And it has renewed calls from medical and recreational marijuana advocates for a change in federal law to catch up with the country’s changing views on marijuana.

Maine is a state with a deep tradition of gun ownership. More than half of Maine adults – 55 percent – surveyed in a Portland Press Herald poll of voters last October said they owned at least one gun.

Maine also is one of 28 states that allows medicinal use of pot, and tens of thousands of Mainers have received doctors’ certificates to use the drug. It is one of eight states plus the District of Columbia that have voted to legalize recreational use by adults 21 and older. Recreational use becomes legal in Maine on Monday.

However, the federal government classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug, putting it in the same category as heroin, LSD and ecstasy. Marijuana users who lie on the form and deny cannabis use, whether for medicinal use or not, could face federal charges. Lying on a federal gun purchase form is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

Question 11e on Form 4473 – which asks if the buyer is “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana … or any other controlled substance?” – now has a warning printed below it in bold type that states: “The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.”

COURT UPHOLDS ATF’S POSITION

While the federal government has so far taken a hands-off approach to states that allow recreational or medicinal use of the drug, the new language on gun purchase forms is intended to send a clear message that the permissive attitude does not extend to gun ownership.

“It’s really a ‘Guys, we mean it’ kind of statement,” David Boyer, who managed the campaign to legalize recreational marijuana in Maine, said of the revision. “It is putting a lot of people in an uncomfortable position by either not letting them own a gun for hunting or self-defense, or lying so they can have a gun for protection or hunting.”

Form 4473 is updated every couple of years. The timing of the new warning on the form is not related to the transfer of power in Washington, D.C., although it comes as marijuana legalization advocates around the country watch to see if the Trump administration will take a more hostile approach to their movement.

The revision was intended to make it clear to individuals who are completing Form 4473 that federal law does not recognize the state issuance of medical marijuana cards, said Christopher Arone, a special agent and public information officer for the ATF Boston Field Division. The warning also applies to non-medicinal marijuana use by adults in states like Maine.

Federal law prohibits gun purchases by an “unlawful user and/or an addict of any controlled substance,” a provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968. The ATF clarified in a 2011 memo to gun dealers that the law applies to marijuana users regardless of whether the state in which they live has passed legislation allowing marijuana use for medicinal purposes. The ATF had told gun sellers they can assume a person with a medical marijuana card uses the drug, and therefore is not qualified to purchase a gun.

The ATF’s position was recently upheld in federal court.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last August that the ban on sales of guns to medical marijuana card holders does not violate the Second Amendment. The court ruled that Congress reasonably concluded that marijuana “raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated.” The court also concluded that it’s reasonable for regulators to assume medical marijuana card holders use marijuana.

While the prohibition is difficult to enforce and there is no drug-testing required when purchasing a gun, a gun owner could be charged with falsifying the form if the ATF later learns that he or she is a medicinal or recreational user.

NO REGISTRATION IN MAINE

Unlike in some states, Mainers who become certified as medical marijuana patients do not have to register with the state, so there is no central database that could be used to screen whether a gun purchaser should be disqualified. More than 35,000 medical marijuana certificates had been distributed by Maine doctors as of last year, according to the state, but that number includes duplicate and replacement certificates, and is likely higher than the actual number of patients at the time.

Advocates say the federal government is unfairly casting marijuana as a more dangerous substance than it is, and wrongly concluded that marijuana users cannot safely use guns when not intoxicated. They say marijuana users are being deprived of a constitutional right and are pushing for the federal government to reschedule marijuana or legalize it entirely to resolve issues like this.

“Maine is known for hunting and we have remote areas where people need (guns) for security,” said Catherine Lewis, a board member of Medical Marijuana Caregivers of Maine. “It’s Catch-22. As American citizens and residents of Maine, we have the right to protect ourselves. There have been instances of home invasions where people have felt the need for protection. To say they cannot possess a firearm for their own protection is really wrong of the federal government.”

Lewis said the trade group frequently encounters questions about firearms during educational sessions it offers to new patients and caregivers. Before the Form 4473 revision, Lewis and others with the group told people they had to determine for themselves how to answer the question. Some medical marijuana users in Maine feel they are legally using the substance and are not addicted and answer with that in mind, she said.

“They had to determine if they were illegally using or addicted (to marijuana) to answer lawfully,” Lewis said.

The change in the form has not been widely publicized and many patients may not yet know about the warning. But as patients and other marijuana users become aware of the language added to the form, there is likely to be strong reaction from Mainers who hunt or use guns for protection, Lewis said.

“I think there will be a huge outcry, as there should be,” she said. “One by one our constitutional rights are being stripped from the American people.”

POSITIONS OF ADVOCACY GROUPS

The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit, disputes the government’s position that marijuana users cannot safely use guns and believes that responsible cannabis users should be afforded the same legal rights and protections as other citizens.

“This is an affront to our constitutional rights and hopefully other Second Amendment groups will stand with us in calling for an end to this practice, but it will likely require the rescheduling of marijuana by Congress,” Erik Altieri, executive director of NORML, said in an email.

The National Rifle Association has not gone on the record with a position on either the 9th District Court of Appeals ruling or the revision to Form 4473. The national organization did not respond to a request for comment this week.

David Trahan, executive director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, declined to discuss concerns about marijuana users and Second Amendment rights. But he said the issue of marijuana users being banned from buying guns “illustrates the conflict between the federal government and the states’ sovereign right to self-govern.”

“It’s going to take some time to work through this policy. Whether or not the federal government agrees with the legalization of marijuana, the more states that do it, the more the people are affected by it,” he said. “They’re going to have to deal with it at the federal level, whether they like it or not.”

http://www.pressherald.com/2017/01/27/federal-agency-making-it-clear-marijuana-users-cant-buy-guns/

monty
1st January 2018, 11:48 AM
The Bunny Ranch Supporters discovered that Jeff Sessions was a big stockholder in the corporation that owns the private prison in Pahrump, Nevada. Jeff Sessions obsession with marijuana



http://youtu.be/QLDE7XTxg24

https://youtu.be/QLDE7XTxg24

midnight rambler
1st January 2018, 11:59 AM
But one can be an alcoholic and still buy/own/misuse guns no problem!

ziero0
1st January 2018, 12:32 PM
You can make a gun. Anything you create is your own. When it comes to buying anything a FRN is incapable of effecting a transfer from one individual to the next. If in doubt on this issue you might check 12 USC 411 where congress makes it clear that a FRN was created for the purpose of transfers between federal reserve banks and their agents. Now if you happen to be an agent you do your purchasing for your principal rather than yourself.

People are delusional when they think they have ever bought anything. The whole purpose of the federal reserve note is to support the economy.

Neuro
1st January 2018, 03:38 PM
I think you only need to admit to it if you are a user when you fill out the form, who knows what will happen in the future? And even if you were stoned when you filled out the form, you may not remember exactly when they come and ask you at a later date... Just don’t post videos on Facebook of you smoking a fatty when you sign the form...

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 11:06 AM
Neither the Second nor Ninth Amendments say anything about using a plant prohibits ownership or deployment of arms.

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 11:10 AM
I think you only need to admit to it if you are a user when you fill out the form, who knows what will happen in the future? And even if you were stoned when you filled out the form, you may not remember exactly when they come and ask you at a later date... Just don’t post videos on Facebook of you smoking a fatty when you sign the form...

The specific question is: "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

If you choose to consume a God-created plant, you may answer NO to that question since consumption of such plants is lawful under the Ninth Amendment.

If ever confronted about that by "law enforcement," your response is "I have nothing to say," or, say nothing at all. No "explanations" or "trying to clear things up."

Jewboo
3rd January 2018, 11:22 AM
The specific question is: "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

If you choose to consume a God-created plant, you may answer NO to that question since consumption of such plants is lawful under the Ninth Amendment.

If ever confronted about that by "law enforcement," your response is "I have nothing to say," or, say nothing at all. No "explanations" or "trying to clear things up."


https://gdb.voanews.com/5852099C-D248-4F0A-81F8-B4762969DFE2_w650_r0_s.jpg
Go ahead Timmy...it's a God-created plant

:rolleyes: illogical CT

Jewboo
3rd January 2018, 11:26 AM
http://stonerthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Smoking-Gun.jpg http://s3.crackedcdn.com/blogimages/2010/06/weedgun.jpg

Some of you guys are being retarded in this thread.

:rolleyes:

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 11:33 AM
https://gdb.voanews.com/5852099C-D248-4F0A-81F8-B4762969DFE2_w650_r0_s.jpg
Go ahead Timmy...it's a God-created plant

:rolleyes: illogical CT


Any "scientific evidence" of an unaltered opium poppy killing anyone?

That's what I thought.

Either "shall not be infringed" means what it says, or it does not.

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 11:36 AM
Some of you guys are being retarded in this thread.


You have an irrational fear of plants. Why is that?

If you don't like cannabis, don't consume it. Simple. I can't stand the smoke, so I don't toke.

Should "we" ban tobacco users or alcohol users from buying guns? What about banning "haters" from buying guns?

Bigjon
3rd January 2018, 12:04 PM
Neither the Second nor Ninth Amendments say anything about using a plant prohibits ownership or deployment of arms.

Unless you have declared your status as a State National you are a US Citizen a person who is subject to all the codes and statutes. The Constitution has nothing to do with you.

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 12:43 PM
Unless you have declared your status as a State National you are a US Citizen a person who is subject to all the codes and statutes. The Constitution has nothing to do with you.

I am a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the God-given rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights apply as written, regardless of black-robed harlots saying something to the contrary.

midnight rambler
3rd January 2018, 12:45 PM
I am a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the God-given rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights apply as written, regardless of black-robed harlots saying something to the contrary.

You know the irony of your above statement is that I pointed out Chapter 110 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedy Code and you scoffed at it. lol

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 12:59 PM
You know the irony of your above statement is that I pointed out Chapter 110 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedy Code and you scoffed at it. lol

Citing either the Bill of Rights or TX CPRC 110 doesn't mean the thugs won't try to "punish" you.

There is de jure and de facto. De jure = God-given rights exist and may be exercised. De facto = "law enforcement" thugs - highwaymen - act as highwaymen have always acted.

This is why I teach that "I have nothing to say" or similar or nothing at all is the only "response" to their "inquiries" for "criminal (sic) investigations."

Jerrylynnb
3rd January 2018, 09:08 PM
My neighbor across town (I don't know him) wants to sell his in-perfect-good-order shotgun because he winds up with too many. I hear about it. We met, talk, I shoot, I'm satisfied, we wrangle, we agree. I give him money, he gives me the shotgun.

What the hell business of anybody else's is that?

Especially the federal government! Is this supposed to have some impact on national governmental issues? With other govenments? What!

Tell me it ain't so. Has congress gone absolutely insane? How the hell did we ever break free from the King of England except practically everybody in the colonies HAD A GUN - and could damn well use it too!

crimethink
3rd January 2018, 09:20 PM
What the hell business of anybody else's is that?

Especially the federal government! Is this supposed to have some impact on national governmental issues? With other govenments? What!

Tell me it ain't so. Has congress gone absolutely insane? How the hell did we ever break free from the King of England except practically everybody in the colonies HAD A GUN - and could damn well use it too!

You WILL obey! Bow down, NOW!

That's what it's about.

Bigjon
4th January 2018, 05:59 AM
I am a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the God-given rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights apply as written, regardless of black-robed harlots saying something to the contrary.

Only if you deny being a US Citizen can you have that status and invoke your right to be a State National (Minnesotan, Iowan, etc.)

boogietillyapuke
4th January 2018, 08:38 AM
If ever confronted about that by "law enforcement," your response is "I have nothing to say," or, say nothing at all. No "explanations" or "trying to clear things up."

Not just “about that”, about anything!

TroyOz
4th January 2018, 08:57 AM
You have an irrational fear of plants. Why is that?

If you don't like cannabis, don't consume it. Simple. I can't stand the smoke, so I don't toke.

Should "we" ban tobacco users or alcohol users from buying guns? What about banning "haters" from buying guns?

I've smoked plenty of cannabis over the years and enjoyed it, but I don't smoke anymore - enjoy being straight even more, plus, like you said, I don't like the smoke. I think I liked it more because it was illegal. Now that is so common, the thrill is gone :) I especially can't stand tobacco smoke - makes me sick to my stomach to even be around it.

Gun rights are not based on plants or spirits - if you are of sound mind, I'm good with that.

crimethink
4th January 2018, 10:52 AM
Only if you deny being a US Citizen can you have that status and invoke your right to be a State National (Minnesotan, Iowan, etc.)

The Federal regime considers all subjects within its territory its property, regardless of whether the property denies ownership. Obey the Master, not them.

crimethink
4th January 2018, 10:53 AM
Not just “about that”, about anything!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

ziero0
4th January 2018, 11:08 AM
The Federal regime considers all subjects within its territory its property
Subjects ARE property. Why would you volunteer into this status?

State national has little meaning when the state is an administrative subdivision of a larger governmental plane. That larger governmental plane itself is a portion of the U.N. plane. They all control what they create and they all have their own 'subjects'. I have no objection to this principle.

crimethink
4th January 2018, 12:40 PM
Subjects ARE property. Why would you volunteer into this status?

State national has little meaning when the state is an administrative subdivision of a larger governmental plane. That larger governmental plane itself is a portion of the U.N. plane. They all control what they create and they all have their own 'subjects'. I have no objection to this principle.

I don't "volunteer" shit. The State is going to do what the State is going to do. Magic words don't make it go away. Force makes its go away. If you can't repel the State, you are a subject, no matter what shysterese you try.

It's funny that Bigjon thanked your post here, since you just contradicted what he claimed ("State national status"). LOL

ziero0
4th January 2018, 03:34 PM
I don't "volunteer" shit.
I suspect if one were to upend you and shake a bunch of FRNs would come fluttering out. Evidence such as this is much more telling than admissions.


It's funny that Bigjon thanked your post here, since you just contradicted what he claimed ("State national status"). LOL
I didn't contradict him. If something no longer exists you can claim anything you like and if the entity is dead they will include you with a dead entity. Compost time!!!

So Sad!!!

crimethink
4th January 2018, 06:48 PM
Only if you deny being a US Citizen can you have that status and invoke your right to be a State National (Minnesotan, Iowan, etc.)




State national has little meaning when the state is an administrative subdivision of a larger governmental plane. That larger governmental plane itself is a portion of the U.N. plane. They all control what they create and they all have their own 'subjects'. I have no objection to this principle.




I didn't contradict him.


:rolleyes:

midnight rambler
4th January 2018, 06:57 PM
The perception of reality is more important than reality itself - see my sig the top Satan worshippers get it.

Apparently Fred perceives that phantasms have the upper hand which is incongruent with his self professed God-fearing beliefs.

crimethink
4th January 2018, 09:02 PM
The perception of reality is more important than reality itself - see my sig the top Satan worshippers get it.

Apparently Fred perceives that phantasms have the upper hand which is incongruent with his self professed God-fearing beliefs.

How sad for Jesus, all He had to do was say some magic shysterese and the Romans couldn't have crucified Him. :rolleyes:

https://manna.amazingfacts.org/amazingfacts/website/truthaboutdeath/images/qa/thief-on-the-cross-large.jpg

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.


The State can always kill (or torture) the body. Magic shysterese cannot change that. "I'm a state nationa..." WHACK across the face goes the baton.

ziero0
5th January 2018, 05:43 AM
the Romans couldn't have crucified Him.

Had there been no crucifixion you would be discussing him rather than Him.


The State can always kill (or torture) the body. Magic shysterese cannot change that. "I'm a state nationa..." WHACK across the face goes the baton.

The State cannot do squat. Seriously. When I see the State take a squat I will believe they have the power to crucify or WHACK. The movie MATRIX warns you to avoid agents. I suggest you take this seriously. You can't outrun them. They are everywhere.

midnight rambler
5th January 2018, 06:46 AM
Fred, are you hoping to be crucified?? ???

crimethink
5th January 2018, 11:53 AM
Fred, are you hoping to be crucified?? ???

"Hoping," no. But I'm not afraid of it. Why are you?

crimethink
5th January 2018, 11:54 AM
Had there been no crucifixion you would be discussing him rather than Him.


Not the point, and you know it.




The State cannot do squat. Seriously. When I see the State take a squat I will believe they have the power to crucify or WHACK. The movie MATRIX warns you to avoid agents. I suggest you take this seriously. You can't outrun them. They are everywhere.

Sophistry. You know what I meant. The State's arms and legs are its goons ("agents"), and the goons are nothing without the State.

ziero0
5th January 2018, 12:52 PM
Not the point
If you cannot be accurate in the small things how do you expect to handle the big ones?


Sophistry. You know what I meant. The State's arms and legs are its goons ("agents"), and the goons are nothing without the State. If you cannot handle the fictional why would you expect to handle the real?

crimethink
5th January 2018, 08:07 PM
If you cannot be accurate in the small things how do you expect to handle the big ones?... If you cannot handle the fictional why would you expect to handle the real?

If you cannot be honest and straightforward with anything, why should anyone take anything you post seriously?

It's all Kosher sophistry with you. You might as well work for NASA - Never A Straight Answer.

ziero0
6th January 2018, 06:09 AM
If you cannot be honest and straightforward with anything, why should anyone take anything you post seriously?
Your post is in the nature of a traverse rather than a response. My presumption on this basis is that you have agreed with everything I posted.

crimethink
6th January 2018, 06:26 AM
Your post is in the nature of a traverse rather than a response. My presumption on this basis is that you have agreed with everything I posted.

In this circumstance yours is an ASSumption, not a presumption. However, as a consolation prize, I award you Six Million™ points for your Jew-Jitsu performance.

ziero0
6th January 2018, 06:34 AM
In this circumstance yours is an ASSumption, not a presumption.
Still no response detected but another traverse. Is this all you have?

So sad!!

latemetal1
6th January 2018, 07:26 PM
There are Gods law and there are mans law, I worry about what God wants, I certain God would not object to a joint or two anymore than a few glasses of wine...just no immediate gun handling.