• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

ATF - Illegal to sell guns to marijuana card holders

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110929/NEWS02/709299919

Firearms dealers in states that allow medical marijuana can't sell guns or ammunition to registered users of the drug, a policy that marijuana and gun-rights groups say denies Second Amendment rights to individuals who are following state law.

Federal law already makes it illegal for someone to possess a gun if he or she is "an unlawful user of, or addicted to" marijuana or other controlled substances. A Sept. 21 letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, issued in response to numerous inquiries from gun dealers, clarifies that medical marijuana patients are included in that definition.
 

MilProGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
1,210
Location
Mississippi
This makes sense to me.

The effect of marijuana on a person's mind and on their reaction time will be the same regardless of whether or not they have a "prescription" for it.

It is still a controlled substance either way.
 

skiingislife725

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
400
Location
Lake Stevens, WA
Makes sense to me. If you've got a crippling medical issue that allows you to relieve yourself of the pain with something on par with alcohol, you should give up your rights to defend yourself entirely. Wait, wait...what?!
 
Last edited:

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
Selling a weapon to someone using mind altering drugs is like giving a free loaded pistol with every 10th shot of tequila at a bar. The two don't mix, you are told not to drive or operate heavy equipment when you are perscribed narcotics at the Dr's office for a reason. The same is for carrying a loaded weapon, if and when I go into a bar and I'm carrying OC/CC I don't drink anything alcoholic. Dam I can't remember when I had an alcoholic drink as I always carry.
 

Difdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
987
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
Just one problem with that "controlled substances" thing. It could include almost every over the counter pain reliever, even aspirin. For example, 600mg ibuprofen tablets are a controlled item, even though you can buy large bottles full of 200mg tablets. Acetaminophen comes in tablets up to 500mg over the counter, but it's illegal to possess 1000mg tablets of it without a valid prescription.

Depending on how "controlled" is interpreted, almost any drug could be construed to forbid firearm possession/ownership.
 

MilProGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
1,210
Location
Mississippi
Selling a weapon to someone using mind altering drugs is like giving a free loaded pistol with every 10th shot of tequila at a bar. The two don't mix, you are told not to drive or operate heavy equipment when you are perscribed narcotics at the Dr's office for a reason. The same is for carrying a loaded weapon, if and when I go into a bar and I'm carrying OC/CC I don't drink anything alcoholic. Dam I can't remember when I had an alcoholic drink as I always carry.

Sounds like the voice of reason to me.
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
Just one problem with that "controlled substances" thing. It could include almost every over the counter pain reliever, even aspirin. For example, 600mg ibuprofen tablets are a controlled item, even though you can buy large bottles full of 200mg tablets. Acetaminophen comes in tablets up to 500mg over the counter, but it's illegal to possess 1000mg tablets of it without a valid prescription.

Depending on how "controlled" is interpreted, almost any drug could be construed to forbid firearm possession/ownership.

You need to attend medical school, there are different classes of medications. Asprin, tylenol, and Motrin are not considered to be class III or class IV medications. Tylenol is considerd more a anti-pyretic and Motrin is a NASID (anti-inflamitory) both work differently as tylenol is processed through the liver and motrin through the kidneys. This is why when someone takes an overdose of tylenol we worry about the liver and if you take to much motrin then we worry about the kidneys. Neither of these products you mention affect the mind like a narcodic does. As far as the 600mg tablets of motrin I usally use the 800mg tablets but today I only had the 200mg tabs so I took 4 of them. 200 x 4 + 800...yea I got my 800mg of motrin this morning and I didn't break any laws doing it.
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
You need to attend medical school, there are different classes of medications. Asprin, tylenol, and Motrin are not considered to be class III or class IV medications. Tylenol is considerd more a anti-pyretic and Motrin is a NASID (anti-inflamitory) both work differently as tylenol is processed through the liver and motrin through the kidneys. This is why when someone takes an overdose of tylenol we worry about the liver and if you take to much motrin then we worry about the kidneys. Neither of these products you mention affect the mind like a narcodic does. As far as the 600mg tablets of motrin I usally use the 800mg tablets but today I only had the 200mg tabs so I took 4 of them. 200 x 4 + 800...yea I got my 800mg of motrin this morning and I didn't break any laws doing it.

For one who criticizes another about medical school, it seems you'd be a bit better versed yourself. "Narcotic" is a medically useless term. It originally referred to opioid derivatives, then to drugs that had a "downer" propert, but now is anything on an arbitrary list. For example, cocaine is considered a "narcotic", even though it is an upper.

Vicodin is hydrocodone (an opioid derivative) mixed with acetaminophen (aka Tylenol). For some, it does practically nothing (e.g. when I had my wisdom teeth taken out, the ibuprofen (aka Motrin, an NSAID - non steroidal anti inflammatory drug) was much more helpful). Others get super relaxed or zoned out when they take it. Some get amped up and loopy.

Due to chronic pain, I know people on this board who are on a constant vicodin prescription. I would not deny them the right to self-defense merely because of a medicine they take.

Why should it be any different for medical marijuana patients? Because of some arbitrary list?
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
'Got enough problems with dopers and guns already.

ATF FORM 4473: e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled
substance?
Checkmate.
 

MilProGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
1,210
Location
Mississippi
'Got enough problems with dopers and guns already.

ATF FORM 4473: e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled
substance?
Checkmate.

And this is why this law is in place.
 

tannerwaterbury

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
269
Location
Kelso, Washington, USA
So... I am confused at the moment.... are they defining Medical Marijuana users as felons, and denying their right to buy a firearm NOW? I still don't understand the issues with Medical Marijuana and its legality STATE-WISE, but I am confused at this.... wouldn't Marijuana users already be denied the right since it's still a federal offense to use Marijuana?
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
So... I am confused at the moment.... are they defining Medical Marijuana users as felons, and denying their right to buy a firearm NOW? I still don't understand the issues with Medical Marijuana and its legality STATE-WISE, but I am confused at this.... wouldn't Marijuana users already be denied the right since it's still a federal offense to use Marijuana?

They are not defining in the statement that medical marijuana users are felons, they are saying "anyone using it illegally OR addicted to....the key word is OR in the ATF's sentence. If you are taking it for a long period of time say in a perscription form and I don't know anyone that just has one cig and they are healed. That isn't the purpose of saying it is for a medical condition; then you are hooked.
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
For one who criticizes another about medical school, it seems you'd be a bit better versed yourself. "Narcotic" is a medically useless term. It originally referred to opioid derivatives, then to drugs that had a "downer" propert, but now is anything on an arbitrary list. For example, cocaine is considered a "narcotic", even though it is an upper.

Vicodin is hydrocodone (an opioid derivative) mixed with acetaminophen (aka Tylenol). For some, it does practically nothing (e.g. when I had my wisdom teeth taken out, the ibuprofen (aka Motrin, an NSAID - non steroidal anti inflammatory drug) was much more helpful). Others get super relaxed or zoned out when they take it. Some get amped up and loopy.

Due to chronic pain, I know people on this board who are on a constant vicodin prescription. I would not deny them the right to self-defense merely because of a medicine they take.

Why should it be any different for medical marijuana patients? Because of some arbitrary list?

So we shouldn't deny the mentally impaired the right to self defense either. What about people that are drunk, let’s give them guns and car keys, it would do away with the DUI problem and increase the funeral home business. Just like with alcohol, and some medications, marijuana impairs a person’s ability to react or make good judgments. If you are on a medication everyday that impairs your reflex or mental abilities then you shouldn't be carrying a firearm. Everyone I have heard about taking marijuana for a chronic medical condition smokes it every day so they are under the influence every day. If that is the case you would agree to give the car keys back to the drunks as we shouldn't limit their ability to drive just because they are drunk.

A upper can be as bad as a downer when it comes to reaction times and making a good chioce when carring a firearm. Most people Identify with the term NARCODIC when referring to a drug that changes a persons way of thinking. We can throw all types of medical terms around but it wouldn't be fair to people that don't have a medical back ground.

You are very impressive with your spelling out a lot of medical terms; I thought about typing out all that crap but decided to keep it in simple terms as not to sound like an arrogant *****.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
They are not defining in the statement that medical marijuana users are felons, they are saying "anyone using it illegally OR addicted to....the key word is OR in the ATF's sentence. If you are taking it for a long period of time say in a perscription form and I don't know anyone that just has one cig and they are healed. That isn't the purpose of saying it is for a medical condition; then you are hooked.

Since Marijuana is illegal under Federal Law there is no way one can be using it legally---under Federal Law. Since the ATF regs are Federal basically they are saying "We don't care if your State says it's OK, We don't", therefore anyone with a Medical MJ card that answers "No" to this question will be guilty of violating another Federal Law as well.
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
Since Marijuana is illegal under Federal Law there is no way one can be using it legally---under Federal Law. Since the ATF regs are Federal basically they are saying "We don't care if your State says it's OK, We don't", therefore anyone with a Medical MJ card that answers "No" to this question will be guilty of violating another Federal Law as well.

Actually there are still about 3-4 people of a grop of 8 that where granted a FEDERAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA CARD by the Federal goverment as a test program. One of these ladies lives in Oregon.

Who are the patients receiving medical marijuana through the federal government's Compassionate IND program?
General Reference (not clearly pro or con)

Eight known* Compassionate Investigational New Drug (IND) patients, four of whom are still living as of Sep. 9, 2010:
Name of Patient
(in alphabetical order) Diagnosis Date Entered
IND Program Marijuana Dosage Per Month
(One cured ounce is about 40 cigarettes) Status
(as of Apr. 22, 2010)
1. Douglass, Barbara
Multiple Sclerosis
Aug. 30, 1991 Nine cured oz (360 joints)
Active program participant
2. Jenks, Barbra AIDS Feb. 19, 1991
(1st shipment) Unknown Passed away Mar. 28, 1992
3. Jenks, Kenny AIDS Feb. 19, 1991(1st shipment) Unknown Passed away July 19, 1993
4. McMahon, George
Nail Patella Syndrome
Mar. 16, 1990 Eight cured oz (320 joints)
Active program participant
5. Millet, Corrine
Glaucoma
Nov. 16, 1990 Four cured oz (160 joints)
Passed away Dec. 2007
6. Musikka, Elvy
Glaucoma
Oct. 17, 1988 Eight cured oz (320 joints)
Active program participant
7. Randall, Robert
Glaucoma
Nov. 1976 Unknown
Passed away June 2, 2001
8. Rosenfeld, Irvin
Multiple Congenital Cartilaginous Exostoses Nov. 20, 1982 Nine cured oz (360 joints)
Active program participant


*There were also two anonymous patients in the program whose names were witheld by request. These two patients are thought to have passed away based on evidence presented below, although their status cannot be confirmed due to their anonymity.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
So we shouldn't deny the mentally impaired the right to self defense either. What about people that are drunk,<snip>

What other natural rights do you want to deny? The right to free speech? Perhaps you want to ban them from church? Perhaps you want to deny them their right to be secure in their possessions, right to a jury trial?

Who should decide what is mentally impaired? Do they only lose their right to self defense via a firearm? Or do you propose removing all knives, clubs, baseball bats, sticks, rocks from their immediate location as well?
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Actually there are still about 3-4 people of a grop of 8 that where granted a FEDERAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA CARD by the Federal goverment as a test program.

These must be the ones the Fed's used in their research that determined Medical Marijuana has no value

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/09/local/la-me-marijuana-20110709

I would say that the Medical MJ proponents could use some help in finding better "public faces". Most of those shown on TV who claim it is a necessity in their lives look like throwbacks to the 60's. What one might expect an aging hippie to look like.

Wouldn't hurt the cause to have someone like Steve Jobs, who is undergoing cancer treatment, to come out in favor of it and show his "Card".
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
What other natural rights do you want to deny? The right to free speech? Perhaps you want to ban them from church? Perhaps you want to deny them their right to be secure in their possessions, right to a jury trial?

Who should decide what is mentally impaired? Do they only lose their right to self defense via a firearm? Or do you propose removing all knives, clubs, baseball bats, sticks, rocks from their immediate location as well?

No you should have notice the sarcasm in some of what I was trying to say.

I don't believe people that are under the influence of a drug or alcohol product should be driving or carriying a weapon to include a knife. The problem we have here is even people that kill others while driving under the influence are not held accountable. We have people in my small town that have over 13 DUI's, we have people that have killed whole familys but are out in years.....it was only manslaughter and the four counts where concurrent. What value do you put on your children, your family.

If someone killed one of my kids by driving under the influence then the court will need to put one of us away for life. I consider driving under the influence the same way I do PREMEDITATED MURDER. I will be waiting at the gate if they let them out after a couple years for killing my child but others are not as concerned and others would just rather anarcy..let everyone do anything to anyone. Who cares, I never said to deny rights and other than breathing what do you classify as a NATURAL RIGHT. Do you give a loaded gun to a 3 year old? I wouldn't but it sounds like you don't care after all it is his NATURAL RIGHT.
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
So then we should make it illegal for elderly people to carry guns because they aren't as "sharp". We should make it illegal to carry a gun if you have been awake for more than 16 hours straight because of slower reaction time due to fatigue? Anytime a person takes any medication that says may cause drowsiness on the label. Within one hour of eating any more than, say 750 calories at one meal?

It is not just the reaction time it is the dicission making capability. I will answer your question about making it illegal for the elderly to carry guns with another questions. True or False States revoke drivers license's of people that show a mental impairment to driving skill due to slow reaction or decision making capability. This is mainly the elderly, my wife does driver testing for the State and she has to test anyone (99% of the time it is due to age) that the state feels might be a hazard. She has one old guy she tests 4 times a year.

Don't get me wrong there are a lot of elderly drivers that are better...much better than a lot of younger drivers but the ones that get sent to test more often that not are due to their age and decision making skills that have slipped.

If you take a medication that said "Causes Drowsiness...you shouldn't drive while on this medication" and you kill a family after falling a sleep at the wheel. Should you be held accountable? Should you go to prision? I feel it is no different then if you went to a gun store and bought a gun and bullets, loaded it, walked out into the street and shot the family then if you knowing walked into a pharmacy and bought the medication, took it, and drove into the family after falling asleep at the wheel.

A little thing called being held accountable for your actions and choices.
 

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Ah yes, the War on Drugs/Terror/The bad people, passing laws about drugs has lowered the amount of folks that use them so well. We had a wonderful example of removing Alcohol from legality in the 20s it worked so well we had to pass another Constitutional Amendment that basically said, "Nevermind". More government has never been an answer to a question of morals.
 
Top