dope smokers and the 4473?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by kimbershot, Dec 28, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kimbershot

    kimbershot Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    340
    if it's legal in colorado to buy and smoke dope--what the implication in buying guns at retail through a dealer?
     
  2. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    13,043
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    If you ask the federal authorities who process those applications, no. You don't fill out the 4473 for the state of Colorado, you fill it out for BATFE.
     
  3. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,505
    Location:
    Illinois
    The question starts with "are you an unlawful user of?"

    I don't see how any use of pot can be considered lawful as it is against federal law (with a very, very few exceptions).
     
  4. GarySTL

    GarySTL Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,026
    Location:
    Warrenton, MO
    I wonder if the BATF pays snitches. See a stoner lie on the 4473 and then call the feds and rat him out.
     
  5. MErl

    MErl Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,283
    The exact question is:
    While not unlawful under state law it is still unlawful under federal law. Given this is a federal form you would answer yes and be denied or lie and answer no.
     
  6. dprice3844444

    dprice3844444 member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,263
    Location:
    se fla i love claymores 01/sot
    unlawful is the catch,it's legal there now starting jan 1
     
  7. morcey2

    morcey2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2010
    Messages:
    2,240
    Location:
    Central Utah
    Colorado says it's legal, but the Federal government says it isn't and can still prosecute for it if they choose to. It's still illegal, so the answer would have to be "yes" and you'd most likely be denied on the purchase.

    It doesn't matter what CO says when the Feds say it's illegal.

    Matt
     
  8. Gordon
    • Contributing Member

    Gordon Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    11,479
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    In California FFL have been TOLD (not written) to have a don't ask don't tell policy, but if some dumbarse shows his "card" or admits it then he is NG. They are against guns , not a little harless fun from other venues, frankly I am POSITIVE the gubbimint would MUCH rather have you stoned than be a gun owner.
     
  9. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    17,025
    Location:
    DFW Area
    It is NOT legal ANYWHERE in the U.S. to buy and smoke dope.

    That is because federal law applies EVERYWHERE in the U.S. and federal law makes it illegal to buy and smoke dope.

    State law may or may not prohibit it, but that's irrelevant. Federal law trumps state law and federal law says it's illegal.
     
  10. dogtown tom

    dogtown tom Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    6,334
    Location:
    Plano, Texas
    1. The dealer doesn't get to "ask"......the buyer either answers yes or no to Question 11.e.

    2. ATF most certainly has told dealers IN WRITING how state medical marijuana laws apply to the purchase of a firearm: http://www.atf.gov/files/press/releases/2011/09/092611-atf-open-letter-to-all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf
     
  11. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,962
    Location:
    Central PA
    An important distinction between federal and state law.

    Federally, it is completely illegal to buy, possess, or use marijuana. Your state may not prohibit it at all, or may allow it in certain circumstances. That doesn't matter as the feds say there are NO exemptions. So, therefore, if you're possessing and/or using marijuana, you ARE an unlawful user of it according to federal law.

    The 4473 is a federal form, not a state form.
     
  12. MedWheeler

    MedWheeler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,553
    Location:
    SouthEastern FL
    The link posted above by dogtown tom makes it abundantly clear. The Feds do not recognize any use of MJ, even medicinal, as legal, especially for the purpose of the transferring of firearms through a FFL.
     
  13. Delawarean

    Delawarean Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2013
    Messages:
    91
    Location:
    Delaware
    What does unlawful user even mean? Presently stoned? Smoked last month? Used it once decades ago?

    If the latter is the case then a lot of people are lying on their form 4473...
     
  14. wheelgunslinger

    wheelgunslinger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,439
    Location:
    0 hours west of NC
    I think the implication is that free men should be able to exercise their natural and 2nd amendment rights, regardless of some checksheet drafted by a bureaucrat and ratified by some corrupt politician.
     
  15. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    9,346
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    The ATF has had a letter to FFL gun dealers out on this since early in the Obama Administration. It specifically states that anyone who offers a Medical Marijuana Card as proof of residence for a 4473 is automatically barred from buying guns or ammo, and is a federal felon if in possession of guns or ammunition. The current link is broken (ATF has reorganized their website) but the file is 092611-atf-open-letter-to-all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf (one reason I download files rather than rely on links staying up).

    ADDED: The only exemption to this is that several states bar local law enforcement from aiding federal law enforcement in enforcing a federal law contrary to state constitution or state law. Already some states where medical marijuana is legal have taken the position that local LE resources will not be used in arresting medical marijuana card holders who own guns (they will aid arrest of violent felons in violation of fed gun laws). Gun dealers must follow federal law and refuse to sell to known med pot card holders.

    How long will it be until the feds demand that medical marijuana card holders be added to the NICS prohibited person list? Pretty soon the only people not on the NICS prohibited person list will be retured LEOs with clean records.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2013
  16. MedWheeler

    MedWheeler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    7,553
    Location:
    SouthEastern FL
    Delawarean asks a good question:

    My interpretation would be that you are a user if you have not permanently discontinued use. If your last joint was yesterday, and you intend to never use again, you are a former user. If you see yourself doing it again, you are a current user. This is considered true with tobacco and alcohol; might as well apply with THC.

    Anyone here know of any case histories or precedents establishing otherwise? I'd be curious, too.
     
  17. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,302
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    What matters is how a court will interpret it, and a court will start with the definition in the ATF regulations (27 CFR 478.11):

    And what does "permanently discontinued" (as used in your interpretation) actually mean? It can really be inferred only from past conduct, i. e., very long term abstention. A mere intent not to do something tomorrow doesn't really mean much.

    And in U.S. v. Burchard, 580 F.3d 341 (6th Cir., 2009) the Sixth Circuit found that (at 355):
    would support conviction under 18 USC 922(g)(3).

    Here's the bottom line:

    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 prohibit person and commits a federal felony by possessing a gun or ammunition.

    4. 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.
     
  18. jmorris

    jmorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    17,591
    This is where I have a big problem. "They" would like everything to be illegal and pick and choose who is going to see their fury.

    I feel any law that is not unilaterally applied and enforced should be null and void.

    I say make it legal nationally or go arrest every law maker in CO, who voted to break federal law, for aiding and abetting.
     
  19. RussellC

    RussellC Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,651
    ....But it is just fine if I am a raging alcoholic or have an oxy script!

    Russellc
     
  20. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,962
    Location:
    Central PA
    Well now, that's not quite what happened. State lawmakers don't vote to BREAK federal law. They merely may choose to never create a state law that copies some aspect of federal law, or may choose to remove their own state's specific law that copies some aspect of federal law. That doesn't mean they've said, "we hereby possess and use a federally illegal product, and require that our citizens do as well." Just more to the point of "no comment."

    A very similar situation arises in some of these states that have "firearms freedom" laws that remove any state prohibition against machine guns or silencers. They don't become legal. They simply are not against that state's law. Now some of those legislatures have come a whole lot closer to really BREAKING federal law, by adding provisions that they will resist with force any federal agent trying to enforce those laws. If you really want to arrest someone for this, better start with those guys.
     
  21. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,962
    Location:
    Central PA
    Why would that be just fine? The question asks if you are addicted to any stimulant or depressant. If you're a raging alcoholic you'd have to answer "yes."

    Why would a medical drug, given on a doctor's prescription, cause someone to be a prohibited person? :confused:
     
  22. rockhopper46038

    rockhopper46038 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2013
    Messages:
    302
    Not a user so take this for what it is worth, but I believe the Federal laws against drug use (and firearms regulation) are clear violations of the Constitution; the 10th Amendment in the case of drugs, the 2nd and 10th in the case of firearms. Do the Feds care what I think? No. Do they care what you think? No. Are you asking the forum to "bless" your decision to lie when answering that question? Good luck.

    Answer as you will, and accept the possible consequences and ramifications.
     
  23. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    12,302
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    Actually, Sam, you wouldn't have to answer "yes."

    The specific condition disqualifying one from possessing firearms is (18 USC 922(g)(3)):

    And a controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act (21 USC 802(6), emphasis added) is:

    So alcohol is not a controlled substance for the purposes of 18 USC 922(g)(3), and therefore alcohol addiction is not a disqualifying condition.

    It might not appear to make sense, but it is what it is.

    And so, for all of you folks thumping your chests about how wrong this is:

    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?
     
  24. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,962
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ahhh, I don't believe I'd ever read the C.S.Act! Thanks!
     
  25. sherman123

    sherman123 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    392
    The word "dope" constitutes an illegal substance. If it's legal it wouldn't be dope anymore. Although since it's still prohibited under Federal law(for now) one could still argue using the term dope. At least until it gets completely legalized on a Federal level.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice