Richland (WA) Medical Marijuana Patient Denied Concealed Pistol License

[Palehorseman]

The possibility for such was debated recently on HR, but that possibility has now become reality.

http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/24...juana-patient-denied-concealed-pistol-license

Richland (WA) Medical Marijuana Patient Denied Concealed Pistol License

Posted: Feb 21, 2014 6:41 PM
Updated: Feb 21, 2014 11:26 PM
Jane Sander, Reporter -

RICHLAND, WA - A Richland medical marijuana patient recently applied for a Concealed Pistol License, but was denied by police.

Medical marijuana is legal under Washington state law, but the federal government won't make an exception for that when it comes to getting a Concealed Pistol License.

Richland police sent the medical marijuana patient a letter stating that federal law prohibits anyone who uses a controlled substance from "shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition."

Read more here: http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/24...juana-patient-denied-concealed-pistol-license

 

[MistWolf]

This is nothing new. Anyone on medical marijuana cannot buy a firearm as they illegally using a controlled substance

 

[Palehorseman]

Would not be too shocked if ATF starts monitoring marijuana sales sites, recording vehicle plates and X-referencing buyers with CC records, for some surprises to holders.

 

[herrwalther]

We had a thread on here not too long ago about how state marijuana laws in Colorado and Washington would effect federal gun laws. This looks like part of the answer.

 

[Old Dog]

Would not be too shocked if ATF starts monitoring marijuana sales sites

I think they've got better things to do ...

As long as federal law stipulates being a toker (medical or recreational, for those that live in Colorado or my state) is incompatible with buying, owning and carrying firearms ... it's a bit stupid to be surprised when stuff such as the saga described in the OP occurs ... As (presumably) enlightened members of the gun-owning community, it behooves us to be familiar all the laws ... not simply the laws we approve of ...

 

[savanahsdad]

that's funny ,,, the state didn't care about federal law when they gave him a dope card :banghead:

 

[Regretful]

How would this pertain to other controlled substances with firearm use or ownership like oxycodone, or benzodiazepines

 

[silicosys4]

So how did did it come to pass that the patient's medical records were available to the police?

More than likely records obtained during federal raids of dispensaries.

 

[Davek1977]

Would not be too shocked if ATF starts monitoring marijuana sales sites, recording vehicle plates and X-referencing buyers with CC records, for some surprises to holders.

Good luck with the CC records amounting to anything. Right now in Colorado, recreational marijuana is basically exclusively cash. While ID must be presented at time of sale, its illegal to record any information, its used only as age verification.

So how did did it come to pass that the patient's medical records were available to the police?

Medical Marijuana cards are ISSUED BY THE STATE. OF COURSE they know who has one and who doesn't, and one wouldn't need his medical records to show that he was a medical card holder. There would be absolutely no "raid" necessary to obtain this information. They already have it and are now apparently cross-referencing that info with concealed carry permit applications. Personally, if I was in Colorado or Washington, where recreational pot is now legal, and (at least in CO) no records kept....I'd forego the medical card and simply buy from those supplying the recreational market in order to better protect my privacy.

How would this pertain to other controlled substances with firearm use or ownership like oxycodone, or benzodiazepines

Under the law, its a completely different animal. There is NO exception for marijuana use under the federal guidelines, even if used medically. Oxy and such is perfectly legal under federal law when prescribed. It doesn't necessarily make sense, but thats the way it is currently.

 

[silicosys4]

Medical Marijuana cards are ISSUED BY THE STATE. OF COURSE they know who has one and who doesn't, and one wouldn't need his medical records to show that he was a medical card holder.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong about that. From what I'm to understand, the state of Washington has NO involvement in administering a medical marijuana recommendation. Currently the process exists solely between the doctor giving the recommendation, and the patient to whom he is recommending an appropriate course of treatment. I don't think the state is required to be notified, and patients are not required to be registered by the state.

The only way the state could have gotten the information is from the federal government, and the only way the federal government would have gotten that info is through prior convictions, surveillance, or the seizure of records from a medical office which would require a court order, or a raid on a medical marijuana dispensary at which the denied person was registered as a medical marijuana patient.

 

[Davek1977]

In Colorado, the card is definitely issued by the state, as I have examined one personally How does it work in Washington, then, if someone gets pulled over and says they are a medical patient, and possesses more than is allowed under law for recreational use? there has to some way for law enforcement to verify whether or not someone has a valid recommendation, and I believe that may be key to the answer we are seeking here.

edit: Upon furhter review, you are right about only needing a recommendation in WA. I mistakenly assumed they had a program at least somewhat like Colorado's, when in fact, its nothing like CO's, and I'm sorry for being presumptious. That still leaves me puzzled as to how officers determine the validity of such a recommendation. However, I don't necessarily believe, at this point, that the cops in this case obtained the information from the feds. There's certainly not enough information given to come to that as an absolute conclusion by any means

 

[silicosys4]

There is no such thing as a universal "card" here in Washington. My friend has a recommendation, which is a piece of paper written and signed by his doctor that says that they have agreed that marijuana is the decided and recommended medication, and up to the passing of recent laws had to keep an original hand signed copy on his person when in possession of marijuana. A copy of this recommendation is what he uses to conduct all purchasing through dispensaries, and to my knowledge, the only place his information is on record at all is at his home, his doctors office, and at the dispensaries at which he is registered as a patient.

Unsettling, but my feeling is the person who was denied had some sort of prior conviction for drug possession...I didn't see anywhere in the article that their medical marijuana prescription was cited as the reason for their denial, just that they had been denied for being a known user of a controlled substance.

 

[Davek1977]

Actually, a simple arrest for possession of marijuana is NOT automatically a disqualifying event(and at least in my home state, possession of any other illegal drug is automatically a felony charge, which WOULD be a disqualifer). While prior convictions may play some sort of role, I do remember reading that it would take two misdemeanor pot arrests within 5 years to be flagged as an "unlawful user". I can state without any doubt whatsoever that a single possession arrest on your record IS NOT a disqualifer from gun ownership. An arrest from many years ago still shows up on my record, and I have never had any issue passing the NCIS background check. To be honest, we need further info before we can do anything but guess as to what happened in this case.

 

[jenrob]

that's funny ,,, the state didn't care about federal law when they gave him a dope card

That was kinda my thought. Question is I know I can have narcotics on me and carry cancelled. Had shoulder surgery. As long as I'm not taking them at the time ATF, FBI and such can do nothing about it, but on the other hand even if I had (which I don't and don't intend to) a prescriptions if the same ATF, FBI for some reason stopped me I'm going to prison for having an illegal narcotic and even if you was legal for the firearm. That just became illegal also.

 

[Davek1977]

Question is I know I can have narcotics on me and carry cancelled. Had shoulder surgery. As long as I'm not taking them at the time ATF, FBI and such can do nothing about it, but on the other hand even if I had (which I don't and don't intend to) a prescriptions if the same ATF, FBI for some reason stopped me I'm going to prison for having an illegal narcotic and even if you was legal for the firearm. That just became illegal also.

I have no idea what you are saying(asking?). Can you be more clear please? I dont mean to be rude, but I truly can't comprehend what it is you are attempting to convey. You cannot be arrested for possession of narcotics while carrying if you have a valid prescription for said medication, even if you are taking that medication. There is nothing under federal law that states you cannot carry a firearm while being prescribed ANY medication, aside from marijuana of course, which isn't recognized as medicine by the federal government. There are no federal regulations about carrying a firearm and being prescribed or in possession of prescribed narcotics.

 

[egyas]

Same thing in Illinois, but that is by state law as well. In Illinois, you cannot be a user of med Marijuana and get a CCW. They are mutually exclusive.

Doesn't matter to me since I would never use it, just thought I'd throw it out there.

 

[Ankeny]

The only way the state could have gotten the information is from the federal government,]

Could have gotten the information from the applicant.

 

[The Bushmaster]

Anyone using marijuana should be denied a gun permit of any kind.

 

[benEzra]

What are the jurisdiction issues with state police enforcing Federal law that the Feds themselves are not enforcing?

 

[JRH6856]

Does the CCW application in WA have a question like the 4473 about use of controlled substances? If so, and the applicant uses MJ and answers truthfully, that is all the info they need to deny.

In such a case, the state is not enforcing federal law as the state is not making an arrest or prosecuting the offense. The state is just using an applicant's admission of violating a federal law as a reason to deny a permit, much as a truthful answer on a 4473 would be a reason to deny a sale, even if the applicant had never been charged or convicted.

Might or might not survive a court challenge. It would be an interesting case to follow.

 

[jenrob]

Dave understand not being rude.

What I'm saying is if you are intoxicated. Unless you are on your private property. Most states have laws prohibiting you from being in possession of a deadly weapon.

Now you can have those intoxicating drugs on you and not using them and carry your firearm and they can't do a thing about it, but if you have pot on you and are arrested federally cause the pot is illegal on the federal level the firearm becomes possession while trafficking or whatever charge they get the person on the charge for drugs is more severe if a firearm is in possession.

At that point it's up to how much money you have to pay for an good attorney.

 

[tarosean]

that's funny ,,, the state didn't care about federal law when they gave him a dope card

Interesting indeed.. Hopefully they won't use it to go after the applicants guns.

 

[egyas]

I'm a "Constitutional Carry" kind of guy, and don't believe that permits, disability, etc should stop you from carrying. HOWEVER, I do agree with what "The Bushmaster" said. A firearm is a tool like a hammer or a vehicle. They should all be used responsibly. When you are under the influence of ANY substance that reduces your reactions or mental facilities, you should NOT be using a tool with he capability to cause harm.

It's as simple as that. Yes, it sucks that the medication you use for whatever reason may disqualify you from exercising your Constitutional rights, but you need to also make sure you are exercising GOOD JUDGMENT. When you're drunk, you shouldn't be out target shooting, or trying to utilize a firearm for CCW.

I'm sure I might get flamed here for saying this, but it makes me sad that people will fight for their "right" to carry/use a firearm while using weed, etc. How responsible weapon handling and weed go hand-in-hand in some people's minds is something I just cannot fathom.

Frankly, people that believe these things do mix make me wonder if they are capable of the kind of judgment needed to make proper decisions on weapon handling, or when and how to use a weapon in self defense or defense of others.

To be clear, I am NOT talking about taking away their right to OWN a weapon. I'm just saying that they should not be choosing to try to carry a weapon in public.

 

[BSA1]

Interesting ongoing States Right vs the Federal Government/Agencies?

My first question is there a Federal LAW that makes a marijuana user a prohibited person?

As best as I can recall the BATF policy for answering the question on the 4473 is within the past year.

Does a Federal Agencies (i.e.BATF) policy override State Laws?

What about possession of FA owned before use of medical mj?

What about private sales?

What about possession of FA owned before the use of mj began?

 

[Frank Ettin]

My first question is there a Federal LAW that makes a marijuana user a prohibited person?

Yes, 18 USC 922(g)(3):

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
…

(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));​

…

to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

Under the Controlled Substances Act marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance and may not, under federal law, be lawfully prescribed or used. Anyone using marijuana is, under federal law, an unlawful user of a controlled substance, even if legal under state law.

...Does a Federal Agencies (i.e.BATF) policy override State Laws?...

Federal law overrides state law.

...What about possession of FA owned before use of medical mj?...

A person who is a user of marijuana is, under federal law, prohibited from possessing a gun or ammunition, no matter when or how acquired.

...What about private sales?...

A person who is a user of marijuana is, under federal law, prohibited from possessing a gun or ammunition, no matter when or how acquired.

...What about possession of FA owned before the use of mj began?...

A person who is a user of marijuana is, under federal law, prohibited from possessing a gun or ammunition, no matter when or how acquired.

A full overview:

1. State law on marijuana is irrelevant.
   
   
2. Under federal law (the Controlled Substances Act, 21 USC 801, et seq.), marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance which may not, therefore, be lawfully prescribed or used. Therefore, any user of marijuana, even if legal under state law, is, under federal law, an unlawful user of a controlled substance.
   
   
3. Under federal law, a person who is an unlawful user of a controlled substance is prohibited from possessing a gun or ammunition (18 USC 922(g)(3)). Therefore, any one who is a user of marijuana, even if legal under state law, is a prohibited person and commits a federal felony by possessing a gun or ammunition.
   
   
4. Federal law defines "unlawful user" as follows (27 CFR 478.11):

   Unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance. A person who uses a controlled substance and has lost the power of self-control with reference to the use of controlled substance; and any person who is a current user of a controlled substance in a manner other than as prescribed by a licensed physician. 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; multiple arrests for such offenses within the past 5 years if the most recent arrest occurred within the past year; or persons found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided that the test was administered within the past year. For a current or former member of the Armed Forces, an inference of current use may be drawn from recent disciplinary or other administrative action based on confirmed drug use, e.g., court-martial conviction, nonjudicial punishment, or an administrative discharge based on drug use or drug rehabilitation failure.

   
   
5. And in U.S. v. Burchard, 580 F.3d 341 (6th Cir., 2009) the Sixth Circuit found that (at 355):

   ...the regular use of a controlled substance either close in time to or contemporaneous with the period of time he possessed the firearm...

   would support conviction under 18 USC 922(g)(3).
   
   
6. Being a prohibited person in possession of a gun or ammunition is punishable by up to five years in federal prison and/or a fine. And since it's a felony, conviction will result in a lifetime loss of gun rights.

And so, for anyone gnashing his teeth and rending his garments about this being wrong:

1. The law at present is that someone who is an unlawful user of a controlled substance (including a user of marijuana, even under a state medical marijuana law) is prohibited under federal law from having possession of a gun.
   
   
2. That could be fixed. Congress could amend 18 USC 922(g) to provide that an unlawful user of a controlled substance would not include someone using marijuana under a state medical marijuana law. Or Congress could amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide for the lawful prescribing of marijuana (just as it does for Oxycontin). Or Congress could fix this in a variety of other ways.
   
   
3. So have you written you Congressional representatives?