Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: ATF says 'no' to pot users...bluntly

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    ATF says 'no' to pot users...bluntly

    ATF letter to FFLs makes it clear: No guns for pot users

    As if it didn’t have enough trouble, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has opened a new can of worms with a Sept. 21 letter to Federal Firearms Licensees explaining that medical marijuana users are prohibited from buying or even possessing firearms or ammunition.

    http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...-for-pot-users

  2. #2
    Regular Member HandyHamlet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Terra, Sol
    Posts
    2,779
    Note to self:

    Obama ignores campaign promise to recognize state's rights over Federal law.

    update:

    ATF has the power to supersede state's rights and state law.
    "Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
    Abraham Lincoln

    "Some time ago, a bunch of lefties defied the law by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, resulting in their arrests. Last week, a bunch of them pulled the same stunt and - using patented Lefist techniques - provoked the Park Police into having to use force to arrest them."
    Alexcabbie

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    So they enforce laws when they shouldn't, and ignore laws when they should pay attention. Got it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    This recent BATFE ruling poses an interesting predicament in Oregon. Teh OR Supreme Court recently ruled that OR CC permit holders who ALSO have medical marijuana cards can NOT have their CC permits pulled, and that having a medeical marijuana card poses no impediment to getting or keeping a CC permit...

    http://volokh.com/2011/05/19/oregon-...al-drug-users/

    The BATFE is out of control. Are they going to make the same ruling for other prescription drugs that are psychoactive? What about Prozac, Xanax, or Lithium? What about Adderall or Ritalin? What about prescription opiates for chronic pain like Vicodin, Oxycodone, Codeine?

    Different rules for different people--just more "class warfare" from Washington...


    So just to make sure I've got this right, let me re-cap the BATFE's new policy:

    If you use a legally-prescribed drug that they don't like, you can't buy, own, or possess a firearm.

    But if you are SELLING tons of ILLEGAL drugs, killing dozens of LEOs and politicians and hundreds of innocent citizensin two nations, and engaged in large-scale international organized criminal enterprises, the BATFE actually SUPPLIES you with shipping containers full of firearms, illegally, in violation of US and Inernational law?

    OK, I get it. Now I think we all know who (and where) the REAL criminals are in the USA...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 09-27-2011 at 06:06 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Battle Creek, MI
    Posts
    578
    If you dont tell, I wont ask...simple as that.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    The BATFE is out of control. Are they going to make the same ruling for other prescription drugs that are psychoactive? What about Prozac, Xanax, or Lithium? What about Adderall or Ritalin? What about prescription opiates for chronic pain like Vicodin, Oxycodone, Codeine?
    The FAA will not allow someone to fly (be a pilot) or learn to fly if that person is lawfully prescribed any ADHD medication, regardless if the substance is a stimulant or not.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    Are they going to make the same ruling for other prescription drugs that are psychoactive? What about Prozac, Xanax, or Lithium? What about Adderall or Ritalin? What about prescription opiates for chronic pain like Vicodin, Oxycodone, Codeine?
    They have created a new special class for marijuana.

    Yes, it has long been illegal to possess any firearm or ammunition while "an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance". Note the wording: "....or addicted to .... any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance".

    Addiction to a controlled substance is not necessarily illegal. Millions of Americans are addicted to lawfully prescribed controlled substances. It is exactly as illegal --no more, no less-- for them to possess any firearm or ammunition, as it is for the crack junky in the back alley. Or, the medical marijuana patient who is abiding by state law.

    Only in the case of medical marijuana has the ATF decided to remind FFLs that they must not transfer any firearms or ammunition to someone they "reasonably believe" to be in possession of a medical marijuana card, no matter how they answer Question 12.e. on Form 4473, and regardless of any evidence, knowledge, or even "reasonable belief" about the persons' use, or lack thereof, of any controlled substance.

    To treat it equally, they would have to refuse sales to anyone they reasonably believe to be a chronic pain patient, pulmonary patient, or other "addict" to controlled substances.
    Last edited by KBCraig; 09-28-2011 at 05:06 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I'm a wee bit conflicted on this entire issue. Booze and guns do not mix, legally prescribed medication and guns do mix.
    It all depends on the effects on the body imo. One to three drinks with dinner isn't something that should be illegal and likewise someone shouldn't be denied the ability to defend theirself just because they have taken a drug. Now things that cause severe changes in one's perception (such as getting trashed or hallucinations) I can understand.

  9. #9
    Regular Member John Canuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I'm a wee bit conflicted on this entire issue. Booze and guns do not mix, legally prescribed medication and guns do mix.
    The legally prescribed antibiotic for my sinus infection and guns don't mix?

  10. #10
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirbinator View Post
    The FAA will not allow someone to fly (be a pilot) or learn to fly if that person is lawfully prescribed any ADHD medication, regardless if the substance is a stimulant or not.
    Which is sort of ironic, considering that the modern Methamphetamine derivatives that Ritalin is based on was developed by the Nazi's SPECIFICALLY for pilots during WWII, to make them more aggressive, and to keep them awake and alert for long missions...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirbinator View Post
    The FAA will not allow someone to fly (be a pilot) or learn to fly if that person is lawfully prescribed any ADHD medication, regardless if the substance is a stimulant or not.
    There are a great many medications that'll ground you, but only some are go/no-go items. For many of them, whether or not it's a grounding item depends on the medical history of the patient. See here.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    It all depends on the effects on the body imo. One to three drinks with dinner isn't something that should be illegal and likewise someone shouldn't be denied the ability to defend theirself just because they have taken a drug. Now things that cause severe changes in one's perception (such as getting trashed or hallucinations) I can understand.
    I agree, except with the part where you seem to suggest a drink limit. I can have 6 beers and walk away without so much as a buzz. Others can have one or two and be drunk. All depends on the person.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    I agree, except with the part where you seem to suggest a drink limit. I can have 6 beers and walk away without so much as a buzz. Others can have one or two and be drunk. All depends on the person.
    Oh I wasn't meaning to suggest a drink limit (besides that would be extremely hard to enforce). Personally 1-3 drinks would be my limit because any more than that and I wouldn't want to carry due to the issue of all bars making their drinks differently and thus not being able to reliably say how more drinks will affect me (and I generally don't drink beer as every beer I've tried I've thought it tasted like pee). That and if I have more than three drinks that usually means I'm trying to get drunk; whether I succeed or not is a different story.

    Another reason why I said 1-3 is because in dealing with the law if you aren't specific then you run into issues with people (both cops and citizens) trying to abuse the law. The 1-3 can be roughly equated to a .08 alcohol level. Of course this amount of alcohol doesn't mean that one is a danger and a cop should exercise discretion, but again it gives a starting point to protect both cops and citizens.

  14. #14
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I'm a wee bit conflicted on this entire issue. Booze and guns do not mix, legally prescribed medication and guns do mix.
    I'm more than a wee bit conflicted about this issue and I agree with your last comment.

    Marijuana is going to have the same reaction on a person's mind and central nervous system regardless of whether they buy it illegally from some dope dealer off the street or if they have a "prescription" for it and procure it another way.

    It is still a controlled substance either way.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    I'm more than a wee bit conflicted about this issue and I agree with your last comment.

    Marijuana is going to have the same reaction on a person's mind and central nervous system regardless of whether they buy it illegally from some dope dealer off the street or if they have a "prescription" for it and procure it another way.

    It is still a controlled substance either way.
    It is still unconstitutional and thus illegal for ATF to make a ruling of this sort, and for the law which allows this ruling to exist.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    So just to make sure I've got this right, let me re-cap the BATFE's new policy:

    If you use a legally-prescribed drug that they don't like, you can't buy, own, or possess a firearm.

    But if you are SELLING tons of ILLEGAL drugs, killing dozens of LEOs and politicians and hundreds of innocent citizensin two nations, and engaged in large-scale international organized criminal enterprises, the BATFE actually SUPPLIES you with shipping containers full of firearms, illegally, in violation of US and Inernational law?
    Yep. I'd say that's a fairly accurate re-cap, Dreamer.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    The BATF are a little too big for their britches!

    I have some concerns regarding this; maybe more confusion, than concerns.

    Is MJ federally legal anywhere in the US? If not, how do they know if you use it. Is it a new question to ask? Are you suppose to incriminate yourself?

  18. #18
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    The BATFE is out of control. Are they going to make the same ruling for other prescription drugs that are psychoactive? What about Prozac, Xanax, or Lithium? What about Adderall or Ritalin? What about prescription opiates for chronic pain like Vicodin, Oxycodone, Codeine?
    Hell, if they thought they could get by with it they would say the same about aspirin or tylenol.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Where in the constitution does the BATF have the authority to deny the 2nd Amendment rights people were born with? Where in the constitution is the ATF even at? Isn't there something that says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
    I don't get it.
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran GLOCK21GB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    4,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    This recent BATFE ruling poses an interesting predicament in Oregon. Teh OR Supreme Court recently ruled that OR CC permit holders who ALSO have medical marijuana cards can NOT have their CC permits pulled, and that having a medeical marijuana card poses no impediment to getting or keeping a CC permit...

    http://volokh.com/2011/05/19/oregon-...al-drug-users/

    The BATFE is out of control. Are they going to make the same ruling for other prescription drugs that are psychoactive? What about Prozac, Xanax, or Lithium? What about Adderall or Ritalin? What about prescription opiates for chronic pain like Vicodin, Oxycodone, Codeine?

    Different rules for different people--just more "class warfare" from Washington...


    So just to make sure I've got this right, let me re-cap the BATFE's new policy:

    If you use a legally-prescribed drug that they don't like, you can't buy, own, or possess a firearm.

    But if you are SELLING tons of ILLEGAL drugs, killing dozens of LEOs and politicians and hundreds of innocent citizensin two nations, and engaged in large-scale international organized criminal enterprises, the BATFE actually SUPPLIES you with shipping containers full of firearms, illegally, in violation of US and Inernational law?

    OK, I get it. Now I think we all know who (and where) the REAL criminals are in the USA...
    now you understand why we need a RESET in this country ?
    http://youtu.be/xWgVGu3OR4U AACFI, Wisconsin / Minnesota Carry Certified. Action Pistol & Advanced Action pistol concepts + Urban Carbine course. When the entitlement Zombies begin looting, pillaging, raping, burning & killing..remember HEAD SHOTS it's the only way to kill a Zombie. Stockpile food & water now.

    Please support your local,county, state & Federal Law enforcement agencies, right ???

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
    Where in the constitution does the BATF have the authority to deny the 2nd Amendment rights people were born with? Where in the constitution is the ATF even at? Isn't there something that says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
    I don't get it.
    They exist as a derivative.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post

    Is MJ federally legal anywhere in the US? If not, how do they know if you use it. Is it a new question to ask? Are you suppose to incriminate yourself?
    Yes.

    There are 4 Federally subsidized Medical MJ users left out of a total of 14 that were "graced" by the gov for its use.
    University of Mississippi still grows MJ for the gov.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_985030.html

  23. #23
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    They exist as a derivative.
    Where in the Constitution does it say that it has derivatives?
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by rodbender View Post
    Where in the Constitution does it say that it has derivatives?
    Lol!!! That is a funny question. It doesn't. It's that simple.

    Schlitz asked some questions concerning the BATF and they're good questions. The answer is long and usually boring... unless you're really interested in administrative law.

    The BATFE is one of many agencies created by Congress. The "agency" is an interesting phenomenon(branch of law) that came into existence not too long after the civil war. Here's the reasoning...

    Congress wants to regulate something but the House and Senate members are not really qualified to get into the details. So... Congress creates an agency under the executive branch and writes law within which the agency must operate. The agency is then populated with people that are supposedly "experts" in the field in which the agency has been given authority to regulate. In addition, congress gives the head of the agency the authority to promulgate "rules". Anyone see a problem here???

    An agency promulgating rules under the executive branch is "legislating". Well, of course this issue was litigated way back and it was found that if the agency's rules remain within the confines of the power given to it by Congress then everything was ok... no separation of powers violation. In addition, there were due process issues that needed to be dealt with... hence the Administrative Procedures Act. There is one at the federal level and each state has adopted one similar.

    So... if one wants to understand agency law, one would start with a good law outline on the topic AND the APA. It is important to note that it is the "agency" that has been used to grow the power of the executive branch. It behooves one to understand this branch of "law" in order to understand to what point "due process" has been stretched.

Posting Permissions

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