Medical Marijuana Hypothetical

[MDFF2008]

An interesting hypothetical came up and I wanted to see what the prevailing view was.

Given that Marijuana use is illegal at the federal level and thus a disqualifier, would giving up a Medical card via the state's form to inactivate a card remove the disqualifier or would it be enough to simply stop using and just let the card expire?

 

[teratos]

An interesting hypothetical came up and I wanted to see what the prevailing view was.

Given that Marijuana use is illegal at the federal level and thus a disqualifier, would giving up a Medical card via the state's form to inactivate a card remove the disqualifier or would it be enough to simply stop using and just let the card expire?

Yes, but you have to let it expire for a year to buy a gun…

 

[MDFF2008]

Ahh. Good to know. I do want to stress this is not for me, based on my job I couldn't use illegal drugs, but this was a hypothetical proposed to me by a friend who knows I am knowledgeable on firearms laws.

 

[tdt91]

An interesting hypothetical came up and I wanted to see what the prevailing view was.

Given that Marijuana use is illegal at the federal level and thus a disqualifier, would giving up a Medical card via the state's form to inactivate a card remove the disqualifier or would it be enough to simply stop using and just let the card expire?

You should do a poll, or maybe a pole!

 

[aznboi87]

wow I did not realize that canabis is ilegally federally but legally on the state. never seen a state law triumph a federal law. they should either take control and make it illegal through out the country, or leave it alone and let state decide on it. Whats the point having an illegal federal law but state legalized it.

 

[Bullfrog]

wow I did not realize that canabis is ilegally federally but legally on the state. never seen a state law triumph a federal law.

How exactly is it 'triumphing'? Local authorities are not enforcing a federal law. That is fairly common.

they should either take control and make it illegal through out the country, or leave it alone and let state decide on it.

It already is illegal throughout the country.

Whats the point having an illegal federal law but state legalized it.

Do you think this is the only example of something being illegal Federally but not prohibited at the state level?

How many states are there that do not regulate suppressors? SBRs? Does the absence of a state law negate the federal law?

 

[Biggfoot44]

The comparison is Illegal Aliens .

Illegal Aliens are inherently illegal under Federal law .

Various States and Localities declare themselves Sanctuary Cities / States . in open and blatant defiance of Federal law .
( At present ) The Federal Government is taking the political decision to ignore it , and not enforce federal law .

Same with Weed . At present , the Administration has stated that as policy , they will NOT enforce Federal laws about Marijuana ( at least at personal and retail levels ) .

 

[dblas]

wow I did not realize that canabis is ilegally federally but legally on the state. never seen a state law triumph a federal law. they should either take control and make it illegal through out the country, or leave it alone and let state decide on it. Whats the point having an illegal federal law but state legalized it.

Not sure what rock you live under (No offense meant), but marijuana has been legal to various degrees in a lot of states. Califonia legalized medical marijuana in 1996 and Washington State and Colorado legalized marijuana for recreational/personal use in 2012. It's personal use, much like Constitutional carry, has only grown since then.

 

[EXIT WOUND]

You should do a poll, or maybe a pole!

Now that's funny

 

[Park ranger]

wow I did not realize that canabis is ilegally federally but legally on the state. never seen a state law triumph a federal law. they should either take control and make it illegal through out the country, or leave it alone and let state decide on it. Whats the point having an illegal federal law but state legalized it.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people. “

I always felt the Feds over reach too much.

 

[lazarus]

The comparison is Illegal Aliens .

Illegal Aliens are inherently illegal under Federal law .

Various States and Localities declare themselves Sanctuary Cities / States . in open and blatant defiance of Federal law .
( At present ) The Federal Government is taking the political decision to ignore it , and not enforce federal law .

Same with Weed . At present , the Administration has stated that as policy , they will NOT enforce Federal laws about Marijuana ( at least at personal and retail levels ) .

Eh, only sort of.

Not that I love "sanctuary" cities or states, but the point is, local law enforcement does not enforce federal laws. Now, the feds CAN deputize on occasion, but in general, it isn't local law enforcement's job to enforce federal law. Nor should it be.

Just like state police don't enforce local ordinances. You aren't going to get an MSP trooper knocking on your door because they drive through the neighborhood and hear you violating a noise ordinance.

The sanctuary part is that normally local/state notifies feds if an illegal has been detained (and certainly before release). Local/state still isn't doing crap to enforce federal law.

It would be like local/state isn't going to come bust your door down and raid you for violating federal liquor laws (unless state laws are being violated). Doesn't mean the feds won't request local assistance and deputize. But that is still a different story.

 

[alucard0822]

For the OP, current status quo is firearm rights are restored 1 year after medical cards are cancelled or after evidence of use in the form of police reports or drug tests. LOTS of promising lawsuits and scheduling itself is currently being reviewed, so that can change at any time.

wow I did not realize that canabis is ilegally federally but legally on the state. never seen a state law triumph a federal law. they should either take control and make it illegal through out the country, or leave it alone and let state decide on it. Whats the point having an illegal federal law but state legalized it.

Simple answer is that the federal government does not have the authority to ban it, cannot require states and municipalities to enforce interstate commerce and federal tax schemes to enforce it. The Federal government crafted alcohol prohibition schemes around that premise, they had to change the constitution by amendment to gain the authority to enact alcohol prohibition as it was universally recognized to be unconstitutional before the 18th amendment. In the 30s, they wanted to ban it for mostly racial reasons, with some interest by W.R. Hurst in preventing hemp from competing with his paper and textile interests. It also became more popular when alcohol prohibition went into effect, and remained popular after prohibition was repealed. With the "success" of the 34NFA in side stepping the constitution to ban firearms through a prohibitive tax, and refusing to make stamps available, and impossible to comply, they basically copied the strategy with the 37 Marihuana tax act.

Being violations were federal tax violations, and not an actual "ban" in order to avoid the fact there is 0 constitutional authority granted to the federal government to ban it, and unless states passed their own laws, 0 reason to enforce federal tax code. The tax act was found unconstitutional in 1969. Congress came up the CDS act in 1970 to use another strategy to ban it. Instead of leveraging constitutional tax authority, it was the interstate commerce clause, also a federal scheme that did not require state level enforcement. The act included a provision for the Shafer commission to study substances and determine what schedule to place them under. In an act of embarrassing honesty the commission found cannabis should not be scheduled at all, and in violation of the act itself Nixon's admin, as part of their "war on drugs" placed it on the most restrictive schedule 1 anyway. There it remains, every administration has the opportunity to reschedule it, every congress has the opportunity to end it, and every court has the ability to overturn a series of laws that blatantly violate the constitution.

As a gun rights advocate, even if you don't care for the whole cannabis reform movement, it is important to understand, and to support. The strategies and laws of the 34NFA, 37MTA, 68GCA 70CDSA are all VERY similar, and many of the court cases overlap. The defense strategy in Leary vs US that got the 37 MTA tossed could be applied to get the similar tax stamp scheme of the 34 NFA tossed. Same with the CDS and GCA sharing "interstate commerce" and a few other legal precedents as the justification for authority to enact and enforce the law. In the end those who prohibit our rights in both parties use almost the same strategies, and both civil rights movements have been working to overcome nearly a century of unconstitutional laws, and perhaps millions of people arrested and imprisoned over them.

 

[clandestine]

Many peoples lives revolve around Drugs and Alcohol. They refuse to accept the consequences.

 

[MDFF2008]

Why do you have to wait a whole year? If you invalidate it shouldn't that be that?

Is that that they only update once a year?

 

[adit]

Why do you have to wait a whole year? If you invalidate it shouldn't that be that?

Is that that they only update once a year?

Because THEY make the rules.

 

[fishgutzy]

Ahh. Good to know. I do want to stress this is not for me, based on my job I couldn't use illegal drugs, but this was a hypothetical proposed to me by a friend who knows I am knowledgeable on firearms laws.

Have to be careful of CBD products that are federal legal, too

They can cause a positive pee test. Doesn't matter what caused it.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

 

[rbird7282]

The comparison is Illegal Aliens .

Illegal Aliens are inherently illegal under Federal law .

Various States and Localities declare themselves Sanctuary Cities / States . in open and blatant defiance of Federal law .
( At present ) The Federal Government is taking the political decision to ignore it , and not enforce federal law .

Same with Weed . At present , the Administration has stated that as policy , they will NOT enforce Federal laws about Marijuana ( at least at personal and retail levels ) .

Not the best comparison considering the federal government is ignoring illegal immigration as well as the states


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Docster]

Asked and previously answered in threads here

 

[ras_oscar]

To further expand the hypothetical: If Biden successfully reschedules to schedule 3, substances with medical applications available legally with prescription, does that mean if one has a weed card one is no longer prohibited or does the Gun Control act itself have to be changed also?

 

[BurkeM]

To further expand the hypothetical: If Biden successfully reschedules to schedule 3, substances with medical applications available legally with prescription, does that mean if one has a weed card one is no longer prohibited or does the Gun Control act itself have to be changed also?

The GCA doesn't name prohibited substances.

18 USC 922(G)(3)

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

An Executive Order could fix all that.