Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: i guess the law is the law

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    6

    Post imported post

    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/89564737.html

    Just thought i would share this.......the law does state that if you are a known user of specific drugs, you are banned from purchasing firearms.....

    It will be interesting if this individual fights this, as i dont think it has been fought as of yet........

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    I just did a quick perusal of the RCW (9.41.040) and there doesn't appear to be anything in STATE law that bars an un-convicted drug user from owning or possessing weapons.

    The issue here is FEDERAL law and the restriction on FFL dealers in selling to someone with a history of drug use.

    If he answered "NO" to question 12 e (Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?) of the 4473's he filled out while attempting to buy those new guns, he could be subject to prosecution on felony charges.

    I am sure his argument is that he is not an "unlawful" user because state law allows it, but I seem to remember pretty clearly when CA first allowed MM, and then when we did it, the whole State vs. Feds issue coming up. If he is in the business of taking advantage of these laws for profit you would think he knows about the Federal stance. Pretty silly argument that you were thinking about state law when filling out a federal form.

    Interesting catch 22 when the Feds continue to list marijuana as a controlled substance without any legitimate medical use and states decide to allow "medical" use. Is it right or fair? I don't know, but the law is the law.

    Knowledge is power.

    My suggestion would be the more he whines and gets attention, the less sympathy he is going to get. Sounds like he is facing charges under state law for being a little fast and loose with the rules. Maybe he should just shut up and find someone to do a private sale. I imagine he has made enough coin selling weed that he can afford it...

  3. #3
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    I just did a quick perusal of the RCW (9.41.040) and there doesn't appear to be anything in STATE law that bars an un-convicted drug user from owning or possessing weapons.

    The issue here is FEDERAL law and the restriction on FFL dealers in selling to someone with a history of drug use.

    If he answered "NO" to question 12 e (Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?) of the 4473's he filled out while attempting to buy those new guns, he could be subject to prosecution on felony charges.

    I am sure his argument is that he is not an "unlawful" user because state law allows it, but I seem to remember pretty clearly when CA first allowed MM, and then when we did it, the whole State vs. Feds issue coming up. If he is in the business of taking advantage of these laws for profit you would think he knows about the Federal stance. Pretty silly argument that you were thinking about state law when filling out a federal form.

    Interesting catch 22 when the Feds continue to list marijuana as a controlled substance without any legitimate medical use and states decide to allow "medical" use. Is it right or fair? I don't know, but the law is the law.

    Knowledge is power.

    My suggestion would be the more he whines and gets attention, the less sympathy he is going to get. Sounds like he is facing charges under state law for being a little fast and loose with the rules. Maybe he should just shut up and find someone to do a private sale. I imagine he has made enough coin selling weed that he can afford it...
    That makes a lot of sense.

    As I predicted very early on, I'm betting some sort of charges will be filed against Steve. And he just keeps digging the potential hole deeper, and deeper imho (both legally, and in regards to PR).
    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

  4. #4
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    The issue here is FEDERAL law and the restriction on FFL dealers in selling to someone with a history of drug use.

    If he answered "NO" to question 12 e (Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?) of the 4473's he filled out while attempting to buy those new guns, he could be subject to prosecution on felony charges.
    Would this not be just mere suspicion as they do not have proof he uses marijuana, just that he has a prescription for it and grows it in his home.
    He has not been convicted of drug possession or a urine test to show use, where the proof?
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Dave_pro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,227

    Post imported post

    BigDave wrote:
    911Boss wrote:
    The issue here is FEDERAL law and the restriction on FFL dealers in selling to someone with a history of drug use.

    If he answered "NO" to question 12 e (Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?) of the 4473's he filled out while attempting to buy those new guns, he could be subject to prosecution on felony charges.
    Would this not be just mere suspicion as they do not have proof he uses marijuana, just that he has a prescription for it and grows it in his home.
    He has not been convicted of drug possession or a urine test to show use, where the proof?
    No proof, other than his admissions to the media, and postings on various forums.
    "I'm just a no-account screed-peddler" Dave Workman http://goo.gl/CNf6pB

    "We ought to extend the [1994] assault weapons ban" George W Bush

    "The Bush Administration declared a permanent ban today on almost all foreign-made semiautomatic assault rifles." George Bush Sr, New York Times on July 8, 1989

    "I support the Brady bill and I urge the Congress to enact it without delay." Ronald Regan.

    "Guns are an abomination." Richard Nixon

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    923

    Post imported post

    hey guys this is already being talked about in 2 other threads can we please not make a third
    A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •