In late September, I wrote about the letter sent by the ATF to all federally licensed firearms dealers, explaining that it was illegal to sell guns or ammunition to state-licensed medical marijuana users.
The reasoning behind this was a clause in the Federal Firearms Act that states that a person cannot purchase or possess a gun if they are “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance.” The ATF reminded gun dealers that marijuana is still illegal according to the federal government, and that having a medical marijuana license was proof that a person fit the definition of an unlawful user or addict. Of course, a state-licensed patient is a lawful user as far as the state is concerned, but as we have seen, the feds do not care all that much about state law.
In a debate between MPP’s Steve Fox and former head of the ATF Mike Sullivan, Sullivan repeatedly claimed that the ATF’s hands were tied in this matter. Contrary to the claims that the ATF is simply reminding gun dealers about the law, the ATF actually has the discretion to define what they consider to be an “unlawful user.” In the absence of a court decision clarifying the definition, the ATF had every right to issue a memo that instead declared state-legal medical marijuana users to be lawful users and exempt from this particular status. Instead, they decided to use the vague law as a cover to deny sick people their constitutional right to bear arms.
Well, it looks like this might get cleared up in the (reasonably) near future.
On Oct. 4, outspoken Nevada medical marijuana advocate Rowan Wilson was denied purchase of a handgun due to her status as a patient. On Oct. 17, she and her attorney announced that she is suing the ATF and the federal government.
If this case goes to trial, federal judges will have the ability to determine whether patients in jurisdictions that allow the medical use of marijuana are, in fact, unlawful users pursuant to federal firearms laws.
Let’s hope they side with Ms. Wilson.
So far, gun rights activist groups like the National Rifle Association have been largely silent on this issue, but smaller organizations such as the Montana Shooting Sports Association and the Independent Firearms Owners of America have offered their support.
When asked why gun rights activists should support medical marijuana patients in this instance, IFOA president Richard Feldman said, “Republicans, Conservatives and independents need to face the dire economic realities facing our nation and stop funding programs like the war on drugs that don’t work, corrupt law enforcement and grow criminal enterprises. Our experience with alcohol prohibition teaches us how to lessen both the harm and the costs to society from banning substances which otherwise law abiding individuals will pursue. As gun owners many of us subscribe to the maxim, ‘Better to be caught by the police with one, than by a gang banger without one’! It’s time American face reality, deal with it intelligently, and stop protesting it, regardless of the ’it’ being guns or marijuana.”
How did the firearms dealer find out she was a patient isnt that protected by HIPPA laws?
ATF gets into the act by allowing house invaders, burglars, and car-jackers to take part against personal use of cannabis.
ATF is screwing up again, but they always put the blame on people who chooses cannabis because it is against federal law.
I can understand why ATF took the stance they did. The federal laws are vague and can be interpreted in both ways. If they make it a policy to sell guns to state-lawful marijuana users and even just one of them turns out to otherwise be a loon, they’ll be subject to a huge public backlash and possibly even a federal investigation and other consequences from the feds because for some reason the feds think it’s just awesome fun to make an example out of anything that makes life easier for state-lawful marijuana users.
I’m glad that this is finally going to court. I hope that the courts decide in favor of Ms. Wilson, that way a clear (and fair) interpretation will be set forth and ATF no longer has to worry about backlash because they will be within their clear legal right to sell guns to law-abiding citizens, even if they do have a medical marijuana license issued through their state without having to worry too much about a huge backlash and (worse) harassment from the feds if something happens. There’s always a chance that a loon will do something bad, and there are loons in every group. But, law-abiding citizens who also happen to hold a medical marijuana license should not be punished as a whole.
The founding fathers determined that our right to bear arms should only be restricted by our individual propensity to harm one another, most of which can be described as criminal activity and regulated by the judicial system. For all the rest of us that pose no threat to one another, they wrote into the constitution all the permission we need to own any weapon we want. The greatest fear of government is that too many people will hear that message. Gun control laws are designd for no other reason than to protect the government from having to face an angry constituency that can actually DO something about thier anger. They don’t give a rats ass about YOUR safety.
@WATEVA:
A firearms dealer is required to fill out a federal form, ATF 4473, and on that form, question 11-e that question is asked. The form specifically says “I understand that a person who answers “yes” to questions 11.b. through 11.k. is prohibited from purchasing or receiving a firearm.”
That’s why the ATF REMF says their hands are tied.
However, there’s a different technical issue here besides simply the second amendment, the war on drugs, the ATF Nazis, and such. The entire case may turn on that technical issue. I don’t want to tip any hands in the case, but the ATF has no defense in this one.
first of all weed is not addictive and with a medical perscrption ”permite” lawfull, so we see this is just another ploy to violate our rights they took an oath to protect
Unfortunately the state of Nevada shares medical marijuana patient information, that is how the ATF new to deny her. The lawsuit should be filed against the state of Nevada for sharing patient information. The state has admitted to doing this even though it is illegal under the Nevada medical marijuana law NRS 453A. The Nevada med mar program utilizes the DMV to register patients, I believe they are still sharing this information.