Concealed firearms and controlled substances?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you answer yes you will likely be denied, answering no you will be doing something illegal.
Federaly you are commiting a felony already by being "an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant,stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance"
In fact if you answered no on the 4473 form you already broke the law if you had been using regularly at the time.

My advice would be to stop using it, even if permited and legal by your state, and then correctly and honestly answer no.

Since pot is illegal at the federal level, anyone using it even in a way legal in the state is still using it illegaly federaly, and if also in possession of a firearm and purchasing firearms while a user of such a controlled substance, especialy filling out 4473 forms is commiting multiple federal felony offenses.


Want some serious irony?
If you have legal prescription and a paper trail showing you have been a regular user for some time, it would be quite easy for the feds to show both prescriptions issued before and after the time a 4473 was filled out, demonstrating you have been a regular user of an illegal controlled susbtance (illegal federaly no matter what your state says) and lying on 4473s. A legal prescription at the state level is in fact a well documented paper trail of illegal activity at the federal level.

I am sorry the law is the way it is. Hopefully someone such as yourself can go through the painful court process and prevail, and then people such as yourself can benefit at thier expense. Until then however, many of your actions are illegal. You are commiting felonies on a regular basis.
 
Are you a pot head too? :D

Heh. No, but I'm a firm believer that the war on (some) drugs has been the quickest way to tyrrany in this country, and that, even according to the governments own studies, marijuana is one of the most beneficial and overall least harmful medicines out there, yet it's treated as equivalent to crack cocaine? Yeah, right. What a crock.

But there are more personal reasons having to do with a close family member and her struggles with disease and illness and relief from same. I also was a person who probably could have benefitted quite well from medical use of marijuana several years ago, but it was safer for the doctors for them to just prescribe me oxycodone instead.

I'm currently drug-free and have been for several years, but it wasn't an easy thing and no thanks to the docs who prescribed me that crap in the first place.
 
My advice would be to stop using it, even if permited and legal by your state, and then correctly and honestly answer no.

The question really is "for how long"? Something like 40% of the US population has at least tried marijuana. Are they all permanently barred from buying firearms? How long do I have to stop using it to truthfully answer "NO" to the question? I'm not addicted, but if I have to stop for very long that means I have to go back on a ton of very bad and very expensive prescription pills.

Even though there is a paper trail that says I have a medical marijauna card, they cannot prove that I ever have used it. I have a prescription for allergy meds too...but I'm not "on" those. The only way they would know if I was using it at the time of the CCP application is to do a urine test, which they don't do.
 
Check with a lawyer; you may can refuse to answer the question because it would be self-incriminating, and just leave it blank. Or, maybe your state doesn't give a damn about the federal anti-marijuana laws and you can safely answer "yes" (it's a 10th Amendment thing; powers delegated to the states)

One more thing; does it ask you specifically what controlled substance? If not, you should have nothing to worry as long as you can answer "Yes Yes" to the next question about the doctor and prescription. Cocaine (for example) *is* legal with a prescription. (I don't remember what it's approved for.) I have a few leftover Vicodan and oxycodone tablets from a previous back injury. I take one every once in a great while if I have a bad headache or a toothache or something. The Vicodan is no big deal, but the Oxy is the formulation without any tylenol or aspirin in it, and as such is a Schedule II controlled substance. But that's OK because they were prescribed to me by a physician.
 
Even though there is a paper trail that says I have a medical marijauna card, they cannot prove that I ever have used it. I have a prescription for allergy meds too...but I'm not "on" those. The only way they would know if I was using it at the time of the CCP application is to do a urine test, which they don't do.
Yeah, they couldn't prove it, until you blabbed to the entire internet about it ;).
 
Answer all questions truthfully, No grey answers, or vague answers. As it will more than likely come back and bite you. You are in a pickle, all-tho I do not normally condone anyone carrying while under the influence of anything (legal or illegal) that may impair their judgment, I do not know all the facts in your pickle. I'm thinking the answer will lay with your Chief LEO, as mentioned earlier you should probably sit down and talk with him. Good luck.

Vince
 
Block,

One way I would look at it (especially if I was a prosecutor) would be that if you had a legal license to grow and use, then there would at least be some presumption that you were using during the valid period of that permit.

Perhaps you could prove otherwise by taking a drug test. Maybe you could stop using for 30 days, take a drug test, and then fill out the form the day you got your negative result back. Then you have "proof" (in the I'm not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one kind so don't take anything I say too seriously kind of way)

Actually, now that I think about it, that might not be a half bad idea if you can do without for a month.

Reid
 
Don't know why you're growing or using you own weed, but it's pretty obvious that the State of Oregon is doing nothing but scamming a bunch of y'all for extra revenue and committing fraud by letting you believe that with a doctor's note and some cash you can grow your own and be legal.

I don't know what your medical condition is, don't need to know. Get rid of your grow operation completely, leave not a trace of it in your home. Lamps, pots, fertilizer, seeds, even the soil.

Get a prescription for Marinol or Cesamet and get legal. Then you can answer all your questions truthfully on both your CCW license and your 4473.
 
"Get rid of your grow operation completely, leave not a trace of it in your home. Lamps, pots, fertilizer, seeds, even the soil.

Get a prescription for Marinol or Cesamet and get legal. Then you can answer all your questions truthfully on both your CCW license and your 4473."

thats a crock of male bulvine excrement IMHO. if he wants to grow and smoke/eat his own ganja for his condition what ever it may be{hell boredome for all i care} then power to him.
 
Get a prescription for Marinol or Cesamet and get legal.
Synthetic prescriptions exclude many other therapeutically active chemicals in Cannabis besides nabilone or the delta 9 isomer of THC alone. For this reason, and because drugs are absorbed slower when taken orally, Marinol or Cesamet aren't nearly as effective in most patients as smoked/vaporized marijuana.


Just my opinion, and IANAL, but I would generally recommend against openly posting on the internet that you're both a gun owner and a cannabis smoker, even with the legal approval of your state. The federal government has been known to go to some pretty ridiculous lengths to screw medical marijuana users over (and gun owners too, for that matter), just because they can.
 
I'd generally suggest taking "three s" approach to government stupidity infringing upon ones well being. Federally protected predator taking out your animals? Shoot, Shovel, and Shut up. Government not allowing you to use something that you know to be of use treating your condition? Smoke, hide evidence/minimize risk of detection, and keep it a secret.

The feds are a nasty bunch to cross, and they will take an easy case to prove they're the boss over a hard one even if the easy one is against an otherwise law abiding citizen and the hard one is against a real criminal. Though it's still improbable that you'll get busted for it, you've just increased your chances 100+ fold. By publicly stating that you smoke pot and have guns you have done 2 things that could potentially put you in a pretty bad situation. You've basically painted a giant target on yourself as a good candidate to assert their authority, and you've made getting a warrant about as easy as could be. Medical marijuana prescription + contradictory statement on 4473 + stating publicly that you both actively smoke pot and own guns = multiple felony charges if they felt like making your life hell.
 
Last edited:
Haf to jump in this one

I remeber reading that someone in Oregon got their Supreme court to order a sheriff to give him a CCW permit.

The issue was the guy had a medical marijuania card adn the sheriff was complaining that he would be violating federal law to issue the permit.

The Federal marijuania ban is an issue since at least 30 percent or more of the adult population has smoked marijaunia.

Now as far as federal prosecution, I don't think it is likely.

Let's face it, most members of Congress have smoked pot, most policie offcers have smoked pot or done other drugs prioir to becoming cops.

What else can we say.
 
Now as far as federal prosecution, I don't think it is likely.

Let's face it, most members of Congress have smoked pot, most policie offcers have smoked pot or done other drugs prioir to becoming cops.

You must be unaware then of the local and federal LEO sweeps throughout the state of CA which shut down or harass state legal suppliers on a regular basis. While doing so they retrieve the records of all they have done business with.
They can't simply keep no records of legal business. Both for tax reasons, as well as laws governing the dispensing of prescription medications.

The only thing limiting the amount of busts done is that there is only so many Federal LEO available to do them, and state and local LEO cannot act against state law. They do however tip off the federal LEO to act as thier enforcement on demand to target individuals or those involved in legal growing or ditributing (the pharmacies so to speak) operations.
Many times in such raids they take a single or few federal LEO to act under thier jurisdiction, and large numbers of local Sheriff's deputies or local Police "assist".

They also target doctors who issue the prescriptions to make other doctors fearful of issuing them.

Records of everyone legaly filling a prescription are general kept and available for reference and creation of a database when distributors or growers are raided by federal LEO.

Anyone filling a state legal prescription for marijauna just handed over thier liberty to the federal government who can then remove that freedom at thier whim or discretion. Which means if they get more agents, a larger budget, or an individual becomes a thorn in someone's side, say for political reasons they can act.
 
the 4473 specifically states "are you an UNLAWFUL user of..."

since you are operating within state law, you are a legal user... if anyone tries to harass you about it, you have grounds for an Americans with disabilities act lawsuit... they would be discriminating against you because of a medical condition...
 
File the form fill it out truthfully and legal. Turn it in. It all goes through the state. even you 4473 is done through the State police. Yes it has federal laws in it but is processed by the State.

It doesn't cost you to turn in the application. It cost you once you go to pick up your permit.

If you are denied then fight the system, but don't try to fight it til they start something that you want to finish.

But as for open carry I disagree with them pulling you out and hooking you up if the see a firearm in your car.

If you don't give them reason to pull you over you have nothing to worry about. If you do get pulled over keep you hands on the wheel shut the car of and inform the officer that "just want to let you know so I don't get shot that there is a hand gun in the open setting on the seat or dash.

There are places like Beaverton, Portland, and a couple other places that you are not allowed open carry unless you have a CCL Then you are except from these.
 
The question really is "for how long"?
___________
"Such use is not limited to the use of drugs on a particular day, or within a

matter of days or weeks before, but rather that the unlawful use has

occurred recently enough "
___________

www.ttb.gov/rpd/tdatf391.htm


"SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) is amending

the regulations to provide definitions for the categories of persons

prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms. The definitions will

facilitate the implementation of the national instant criminal

background check system (NICS) required under the Brady Handgun

Violence Prevention Act."



"Such use is

not limited to the use of drugs on a particular day, or within a

matter of days or weeks before, but rather that the unlawful use has

occurred recently enough to indicate that the individual is actively

engaged in such conduct. A person may be an unlawful current user of

a controlled substance even though the substance is not being used

at the precise time the person seeks to acquire a firearm or

receives or possesses a firearm. An inference of current use may be

drawn from evidence of a recent use or possession of a controlled

substance or a pattern of use or possession that reasonably covers

the present time, e.g., a conviction for use or possession of a

controlled substance within the past year, or multiple arrests for

such offenses within the past five years if the most recent arrest

occurred within the past year.



The DOJ Office of Policy Development inquired whether the proposed

definition includes persons found through a drug test to use a

controlled substance unlawfully, provided the test was administered

within the past year. In response, ATF agrees that this information

would give rise to an inference of unlawful drug use. Accordingly, the

final regulations are being amended to identify these persons in the

definition as an example of unlawful drug user."
 
An inference of current use may be

drawn from evidence of a recent use or possession of a controlled

substance or a pattern of use or possession that reasonably covers

the present time, e.g. (meaning example, not the only way in which it would be applicable)

The DOJ Office of Policy Development inquired whether the proposed

definition includes persons found through a drug test to use a

controlled substance unlawfully, provided the test was administered

within the past year. In response, ATF agrees that this information

would give rise to an inference of unlawful drug use. Accordingly, the

final regulations are being amended to identify these persons in the

definition as an example of unlawful drug user

A legal prescription for an illegal substance is a great inference that one is an unlawful drug user at the federal level.
Further since they are giving an example, not the definition, and that example includes use within a year, or a few uses within 5 years that would seem to imply the same for a prescription or other documented history. A documented history of several prescriptions within 5 years would seem to show you are a habitiual offender and prove you are an "addict" and a prohibited person, as a single prescription within one year would.

Also whether one ever uses drugs or not, it is a good reason to never take a drug test for anything such as a job etc.
Some of those tests get false results, others positives not related to drugs. Eat poppy seeds for example and you test positive for opiates. Many legal drugs also give positive results. Legaly one would have nothing to gain from taking one, yet a chance of loss even if not a user.
A single lab mistake or false positive could mean the loss of RKBA for a year in the example given.
Obviously if someone actualy is a user that would apply as well.
 
Check with a lawyer; you may can refuse to answer the question because it would be self-incriminating, and just leave it blank. Or, maybe your state doesn't give a damn about the federal anti-marijuana laws and you can safely answer "yes" (it's a 10th Amendment thing; powers delegated to the states)
According to the head of the only major Oregon firearms lobby (OFF) my county in particular is one of the worst to even think about saying "yes" to that question. But I like the idea of not answering due to self incrimination....

Yeah, they couldn't prove it, until you blabbed to the entire internet about it
I'm really not worried about "them" reading this thread or even finding "BigBlock" and proving anything would be nearly impossible. For that matter I could be 12 years old and making all this up 'cause I'm bored. ;)

I do not normally condone anyone carrying while under the influence of anything (legal or illegal)
It's not like I'm running around stoned all the time. I do not shoot (or drive) under the influence of anything. I'm would guess that most guys on this forum have a beer or three after a day of shooting, I'm no different than that.

I'm thinking the answer will lay with your Chief LEO, as mentioned earlier you should probably sit down and talk with him.
I thought about calling, but I'm thinking as soon as I mention "guns" and "weed" they're going to start treating me like a criminal.

Don't know why you're growing or using you own weed, but it's pretty obvious that the State of Oregon is doing nothing but scamming a bunch of y'all for extra revenue and committing fraud by letting you believe that with a doctor's note and some cash you can grow your own and be legal.

I don't know what your medical condition is, don't need to know. Get rid of your grow operation completely, leave not a trace of it in your home. Lamps, pots, fertilizer, seeds, even the soil.

Get a prescription for Marinol or Cesamet and get legal. Then you can answer all your questions truthfully on both your CCW license and your 4473.
It is a fact that I can grow my own and be legal. I have shown a police officer my bag of weed and my license, no problem. It isn't just Oregon, there are I believe 8 other states, and it's still spreading.

As for marinol and other synthetic drugs, they just are not the same thing. The only way you would ever know is to try them both, as I have, to find that THEY are in fact the scam. Oh, and they're $20 per pill.

Government not allowing you to use something that you know to be of use treating your condition? Smoke, hide evidence/minimize risk of detection, and keep it a secret.
That's exactly what I do. I'm really not all that worried about the "feds", as they don't drive around in black and white cars all over every city. I can't say I've ever ran into a federal officer in my life. The Oregon medical marijuana program is very good about keeping my information secret, and they will not reveal anything to the police or the feds, unless they have specific information that I might be violating Oregon law.

If, for example, I get stopped by a regular OR cop with a gun and some weed, he has no legal authority to arrest or ticket me for anything. If I got stopped by a fed and they found the same, they could arrest me...but how often do you get stopped and searched by feds?

I remeber reading that someone in Oregon got their Supreme court to order a sheriff to give him a CCW permit.
Do you have any more information about that? That's definately something I'll have to look up.

You must be unaware then of the local and federal LEO sweeps throughout the state of CA which shut down or harass state legal suppliers on a regular basis. While doing so they retrieve the records of all they have done business with.
Fortunately I don't live in CA, and frankly, I don't even consider them part of the US. Everybody knows how fruity their laws are, even about guns alone. In Oregon there are no legal suppliers of marijuana, you either grow it yourself or buy it on the black market. No records of that. And like I said earlier the OR state MM program is surprisingly secretive to protect MY rights. I'm not currently aware of any federal prosecution for medical marijuana in OR, though I haven't really looked into it either.
 
It is a fact that I can grow my own and be legal. I have shown a police officer my bag of weed and my license, no problem. It isn't just Oregon, there are I believe 8 other states, and it's still spreading.

At the state level.
If a state LEO does not like OR law he can simply tip off the local regional feds to enforce the national law. That is what CA LEOs do who don't agree with medical marijuana laws.
As I stated they only need a single federal agent present and the rest can simply be "assisting" a federal officer even if prohibited under local or state law from enforcing the federal law.

It's not like I'm running around stoned all the time. I do not shoot (or drive) under the influence of anything. I'm would guess that most guys on this forum have a beer or three after a day of shooting, I'm no different than that.
Can you imagine if a single documented use of alcohol within a year was grounds to consider someone an alcoholic?
For other drugs it will be.

I don't mess with illegal drugs. It is however ironic that someone can brew thier own beer for personal use, and could have a drink every day at the end of the day and not be considered an alcoholic. Yet a single use in a year or a couple uses within 5 years of marijuana makes you an addict in need of serious help, and warrants prohibition of you having firearms.
 
I don't mess with illegal drugs. It is however ironic that someone can brew thier own beer for personal use, and could have a drink every day at the end of the day and not be considered an alcoholic. Yet a single use in a year or a couple uses within 5 years of marijuana makes you an addict in need of serious help, and warrants prohibition of you having firearms.


That's because MJ is the most dangerous of all drugs! Specifically because it's relatively harmless!!

(At least that's how I interpret the federal drug policy.) The FDA says marijuana has no therapeutic value, and they routinely block any research that would prove otherwise. I've never even tried the stuff, but I wish my father-in-law would have tried it a few years ago that last couple of months when he was dying of lung cancer and the super expensive anti-nausea drugs didn't help that much.
 
The FDA says marijuana has no therapeutic value

Yeah, that's what pisses me off most. That is just blatant, ignorant stupiditiy. I has been proven that it does have therapeutic value, they just cover their ears and yell "LA LA LA I CANT HEAR YOU" like a 5 year old. That doesn't mean I think weed should be perfectly legal, but it should be lowered to the status of something like vicodin or oxycodone, which you can buy, use, and conceal a gun under the influence of. :banghead:

Given that, I'm leaning more towards answering "NO" to the question simply as a form of civil disobedience.

Isn't it great that we live in a free country? :rolleyes:
 
The FDA has also approved of drugs that were later found to cause adverse health problems. Read: Vioxx, among others.
 
The FDA has also approved of drugs that were later found to cause adverse health problems. Read: Vioxx, among others.
or ......wait for it...........that have no therapeutic value.......Maybe if the dope growers would just send some money to the FDA that would all change.
 
The FDA has also approved of drugs that were later found to cause adverse health problems. Read: Vioxx, among others.
And some others, that I was taking and caused me to blackout while driving, which could have easily killed me and many others.



Regardless of the laws, I think I'm going to setup a cheap camera and microphone system in my car just like the cops have, so there will be clear evidence of me saying "NO" you do not have permission to search my vehicle. Anything I say can and will be used against me in a court of law - same goes for the officer. ;)
 
Given that, I'm leaning more towards answering "NO" to the question simply as a form of civil disobedience.

That sounds like a really bad idea.

They then go on to ask: what are you using, current useage, is it authorized by a doctor (YES), and do you have a prescription for controlled substance? (YES)

"None of your business", [leave this one blank, or say something truthful but vague like "twice a week"], "Yes", "Yes".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top