Prohibited persons and due process

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ellsnjel

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2015
Messages
86
Location
Florida
So currently the new talking point of the Antigun movement is adding people on the no-fly or terrorist watch lists to the NICS prohibited persons list. This has understandably caused a lot of outrage, but what about other categories of prohibited persons, namely users of controlled substances? Shouldn't we apply the same standard of requiring a trial and conviction for a drug offense, and not simply holding a state medical marijuana card?

They are also having their due process rights infringed.
 
that's one thing I hate about the magical secret lists... nobody knows how people get on or how they are chosen... there have been little children on these lists for no reason... there should be some discretion or a better way... how does one exactly get off these lists?
 
The "No Fly" list is not available to anyone but a few. It's my understanding that most people don't even know that they are on the list until after they get to the airport. This should be interesting to follow.
 
The "No Fly" list is not available to anyone but a few. It's my understanding that most people don't even know that they are on the list until after they get to the airport. This should be interesting to follow.
So if it was published it would be acceptable even though it is a violation of due process regardless if published or not?
 
As of now there is no way to get off the list. And how you get on the list is a mystery. Due process be damned. They'll come up with a way for a person to appeal the list. But it will more than likely take months, if not longer. Someone will have to sue in federal court and it will more than likely have to go all the way to SCOTUS. Of course that's pure speculation. But all we have is history to go by. And history has shown us that the government is quick to take rights away and very slow (if ever) to give them back.

I've never even flown but am still outraged.
 
Last edited:
This has understandably caused a lot of outrage, but what about other categories of prohibited persons, namely users of controlled substances? Shouldn't we apply the same standard of requiring a trial and conviction for a drug offense, and not simply holding a state medical marijuana card?

They are also having their due process rights infringed.

There's a bit of a problem with that analogy. A marijuana card is something an individual has to seek out and apply for. It is basically a confession, or even a declaration, that you are someone who does, will, or intends to, break federal law by using that substance.

You have suspended any need for your own arrest, charging, prosecution, trial, and conviction -- in essence forfeiting your entire due process -- by your own choice.

If you walk into the local PD and say, "I murdered Joe Smith," you'd be doing much the same thing. The due process of investigating, charging, and trying your case before a jury would be moot and (except procedurally) irrelevant because you are charging and convicting YOURSELF of that act. The state has (for the sake of the analogy) no burden to prove that you did, or to convince a jury that you're guilty.

You go and get a state medical marijuana card and you've just declared "I am guilty of breaking federal law, and I AM a user of a controlled substance." So you're admitting a "YES" answer on question 11.e of the 4473 form. Period. Stop. No sale.

It doesn't matter in the very least that your state says it's ok. The federal law that governs gun sales says it is absolutely not ok, and by getting that card, you're admitting to it.
 
Last edited:
The only way the analogy would work is if there was a voluntary "I'm a terrorist, don't let me fly!" card folks could apply for.

That would be very convenient for so many reasons!
 
It doesn't matter in the very least that your state says it's ok. The federal law that governs gun sales says it is absolutely not ok, and by getting that card, you're admitting to it.

I agree, but if the federal government then wants to restrict these people from owning firearms they should go through the process of convicting cardholders. The current administration seems to want it both ways, to decriminalize usage by prosecutorial disgression, and also still treat these people like criminals by denying them firearms ownership.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if they added a flag to NICS to tag someone when they are being 'investigated' by DHS/FBI that would show up for a shopkeeper. Not sure if it would have helped in Orlando, but I could see it also happening at this rate.
 
I agree, but if the federal government then wants to restrict these people from owning firearms they should go through the process of convicting cardholders.
Eh, so, ok I guess there's a point in that. An admission of guilt is not a conviction for that crime. But that really doesn't matter.

Here's why:
IF they were going by question 11.c ("are you a convicted felon?") and preemptively denying you because you COULD be convicted, I'd say that your point is valid.

But that's not necessary. The real meat and potatoes of the matter is that you have to answer question 11.e in order to buy that gun. And, by obtaining the MMJ card, you already HAVE answer that question. So you apply to the state and get a MMJ card, saying "yes! I want to take marijuana," and then you go to the gun store, fill out the 4473 and say, "Me? No! I'm not a user of any controlled substance which is federally illegal!"

They don't have to convict you of illegal use of a drug at all. They simply have to convict you of lying on the form 4473. And that's a slam-dunk because they've got your own admission to it. Open and shut case.
 
Eh, so, ok I guess there's a point in that. An admission of guilt is not a conviction for that crime. But that really doesn't matter.

But it does matter. Admitting to a crime and being convicted of a crime are two different things. It someone admits to a crime, then it is up to a prosecutor to decide whether or not to charge them and have a trial. Admitting to a crime isn't the same as a guilty plea. If they admit to the crime by obtaining the medical marijuana card, that would make a compelling case against them, but the could still plead not guilty.

The question on the 4473 shouldn't be about use it should be about conviction
 
Sure, but read post 11 again. If they're going after you for having bought a gun, they're going after you because you've lied on the 4473. That's a crime.

They know you've lied because you've admitted to being a pot user by getting your state medical marijuana card. Now it will be up to them to prove their case, but all they have to do is show the jury that you have admitted to being a user of the drug (or intending to start using that drug) by applying for the MMJ card. I guess you could try to avoid conviction by claiming that you lied to your state when you got your MMJ card and you really weren't a user and never intended to become one. But that's not going to impress the jury very much. Especially as they'll probably get a warrant and find controlled substance material in your possession.

The crux of the matter ISN'T that you are prohibited because you've been convicted of a crime, or even that you COULD be convicted of a crime. You are prohibited because YOU SAY you're a marijuana user. And, as a marijuana user you CAN'T honestly fill out a 4473 form, period.

You lied, that IN ITSELF is a crime, there's a conviction right there if they seek to prosecute.


Now, beyond the question of purchase, what about possession of a firearm? By your own admission you are a marijuana user. Therefore, (unless you're lying about being a pot user, and getting the state card for absolutely no reason at all! :rolleyes:) it is against the law for you to be in possession of a firearm. See: 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)

To charge you and prosecute you for that they have to have some evidence that you are a) a user of a controlled substance, and b) you're in possession of a firearm. Their first piece of evidence to prove 'a' is that you've obtained a MMJ card! Then, seeing as this is a criminal prosecution, they'll probably get a warrant and search to discover that, yes, you are in fact in possession of and using that drug. Therefore, you have violated 922(g).

This isn't a situation of the government denying you due process. This is a situation of your state government giving you the means to voluntarily disclose to the federal government that you are a prohibited person and may not lawfully buy or possess firearms.

It is a really fascinating situation. By all logic we've created a situation under which we've convinced people to rat themselves out for prosecution and rescinding their own rights. People THINK that having a state law say "it is legal under state law to possess and use pot" means it is LEGAL. But it is still COMPLETELY illegal under federal law, and the 4473 form is simply one manifestation of how federal law WILL affect you personally if you decide to violate it.


This is entirely different from having a secret list of people who might be bad people but who haven't done or admitted to anything we could even start to prosecute them for and denying their rights based on what they MIGHT do someday, we think.
 
Last edited:
The question on the 4473 shouldn't be about use it should be about conviction

But it ISN'T. (One of the questions is about being convicted of a felony. But 11.e is not.)

It says, "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana...?"

That's it. Answer the question. If you answer it truthfully (in agreement with your possession of a state MMJ card), the dealer will immediately tear up your paperwork because s/he can't sell to you.

If you lie and check "No," then you've just committed a crime. Period.

Sure, it is up to the feds to prosecute you for that if they choose to, and they'll have to prove their case. But you've given them the evidence by signing up for that state MMJ card!


Same as if they have some reason to believe you possess firearms and also hold an MMJ card. That's enough evidence, probably, to get a warrant and search your place and prove that you are breaking 18 U.S.C. S/S 922(g). They have to prove their case, but it won't be hard.


Either way you ratted yourself out.
 
Last edited:
Ellsnjel ...The question on the 4473 shouldn't be about use it should be about conviction
A conviction isn't necessary to be a "prohibited person":
-Persons under indictment
-Fugitives from justice
-Unlawful users of drugs
-Persons under a restraining order
-Persons who have renounced their US citizenship
-Illegal aliens
-Persons admitted to the US on a nonimmigrant visa (who cannot provide an exemption)

NONE of those can buy a firearm.
 
A conviction isn't necessary to be a "prohibited person":
-Persons under indictment
-Fugitives from justice
-Unlawful users of drugs
-Persons under a restraining order
-Persons who have renounced their US citizenship
-Illegal aliens
-Persons admitted to the US on a nonimmigrant visa (who cannot provide an exemption)

NONE of those can buy a firearm.
And thus all are infringements of due process
 
At this moment the "terrorist " are doing the killing , they have an agenda....lets watch them.
Stop clouding the water with what if's and's and buts.
If the fox is killing the chicken's, stop watching the dog and eyeball the fox.
Common sense , that's all we need.
 
I'm not aware that it is a requirement that you use marijuana to get a MMJ card. I've been prescribed narcotic pain killers for injuries that I haven't filled. If Ellsnjel wanted to challenge NICS refusal for an MMJ card, he could get one, but never consume any marijuana (confirmed with weekly drug tests). Test case!
 
ADDED ^^ Personally, I would not use a state Med Mary Jane card for proof of residence with an FFL; the Obama Admin ATF sent out a memo on that issue long ago.


The terrorist using the pseudonym "T. Kennedy" got Sen. Ted Kennedy barred from flying five times.

I think "T. Kennedy" the terrorist simply changed his pseudonym.

If Sen. Ted Kennedy had booked as his middle and last names, Moore Kennedy, it would not have triggered the No Fly match on T Kennedy.

That no-fly list is a sick joke. I would like to pack the No Fly list supporters in a time machine and send them back to the German Democratic Republic, whose secret service STASI had great faith in maintaining lists and files on citizens. They'd be where they deserve to be. And out of our hair. I do not believe an error-riddled list with no due process makes me safe.
 
Last edited:
[strike]As I recall, in the state of Tennessee, after you have answered Question 11 (a)-(l) but before you sign, the dealer runs the TBI check who call in the NICS check, and if you are kicked out, the incompleted unsigned form is tossed.[/strike]
Last gun I bought was 2008 so I mis-remembered. I did make a point today to get clarification from two dealers on current protocol. Bought some .22s while I was at it.
After the buyer has answered Question 11 (a)-(l) and all other required information, the buyer signs the 4473.
The dealer calls in the BG check. The dealer notes BG approved or denied, signs off on the form, and keeps it for his records.
Prosecutions for being denied on a BG check depend on whether ATF or FBI have an active investigation open on you and may wait til that investigation is settled.


Some dealers threaten to charge $30 for a rejected BG check (opposed to $10 a clear check). Anyway, there are few prosecutions for people who try to buy but don't pass a BG check. I think the reason there are few prosecutions is everyone recognizes the system is plagued with false positives* and prosecutions would show what a sham the system is.

As Penn and Teller put it, gun control itself is ... a sham.

___________
*Added: two locals had very old data added to NICS and got bit by it. One was listed as robbery suspect as a teenager but was cleared by investigation; the other was detained and held after a routine traffic stop for having the same name as a wanted federal fugitive. The one got a deposition from the state bureau investigator who handled the robber investigation decades prior luckily he was then hometown Chief of Police; the other had court paperwork showing he was released because it was mistaken identity. I consider those false positives, although you could argue that the one was investigated and the other was held making those true positives. ATF has a procedure whereby a person who gets initially denied but wins on appeal can be assigned a unique ID number to be used as part of the BG check next time.
 
Last edited:
And thus all are infringements of due process

Oh.

Ok.

Well, If you want to say that any of those prohibiting factors is a violation of a person's due process, that's rather a different debate than a simple nuts and bolts question of why a Medical Marijuana card can cause you to lose your firearm rights.


If you want to posit that no person, EVER, should have any of their rights abridged unless they have been convicted of a felony crime in a court of law, a very great many of us would completely agree with you.

But that doesn't matter at all because that interpretation has not been upheld by the Court, so far at all, since those various classes of "prohibited persons" were created, starting (at least on the federal level) almost a half century ago.

Unless there's some path for getting a case to, and through, the US SCOTUS to strike down the definition of "prohibited persons" as pertains to bearing arms, then that's just so much rather valueless wishful thinking.
 
Sam1911 said:
Same as if they have some reason to believe you possess firearms and also hold an MMJ card. That's enough evidence, probably, to get a warrant and search your place and prove that you are breaking 18 U.S.C. S/S 922(g). They have to prove their case, but it won't be hard.

OK, hold up. Is obtaining a license to do something evidence that you are doing it? More importantly, is it sufficient evidence that my 2A rights should be limited?

I can get a drivers license, even if I don't own a car or ever drive (after the road test). I could pass the bar exam and never practice law. I could obtain a surveyor's or engineer's license, and never practice surveying or engineering. For that matter, I could get a concealed carry license and never carry a gun outside my home.

What if I used to use marijuana and I quit, but my state medical card is still in effect (i.e. hasn't expired). I can honestly answer "No" to question 11.e. Would it matter that I quit yesterday? Maybe I'll fall off the wagon tomorrow, or maybe I'll never partake again. Either way, I can see plenty of scenarios where possessing an MMJ card would not equate to a automatic guaranteed "Yes" on 11.e, so I don't think we should be so sanguine about an MMJ card being the basis for a NICS denial.
 
Ellsnjel
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogtown tom View Post
A conviction isn't necessary to be a "prohibited person":
-Persons under indictment will either go to trial or the indictment withdrawn. The indictment itself is due process.
-Fugitives from justice well, once they stop running due process will undoubtedly take it's course.:D
-Unlawful users of drugs It's not a due process issue.
-Persons under a restraining order Well, since a restraining order is issued by a judge it most certainly is giving that person due process.
-Persons who have renounced their US citizenship Not a due process issue.
-Illegal aliens Not a due process issue.
-Persons admitted to the US on a nonimmigrant visa (who cannot provide an exemption) Again, not a due process issue.

NONE of those can buy a firearm.

And thus all are infringements of due process
Not in the least........ for the reasons above in blue.
Statutory restrictions don't mean due process is required.
For example. Federal law prohibits licensed dealers from transferring a firearm to buyers under age 21 (with an exemption for rifles and shotguns to those 18 and older)

Try claiming DUE PROCESS!!! DUE PROCESS!!! by a sixteen year old.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top