Concealed Carry - Medical Marijuana Case Goes to Washington

[mikeb302000]

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OOM9801.htm">Bloomberg Businessweek reports

Ryan Kirchoff, an attorney for Jackson County, said the Gun Control Act is designed to keep guns out of the hands of people Congress considered potentially dangerous or irresponsible, such as those who use a controlled substance.

Because marijuana is a controlled substance, the county argues gun ownership would be barred under the Gun Control Act, he said. But the state statute concerning concealed weapons doesn't explicitly address it.

That sounds like a pretty good argument. When it comes to defending gun rights, you know how they pick and choose, applying what works for them and ignoring the rest. This one they want to ignore.

I have a simpler defense. People who use medical marijuana should not own guns, let alone carry them around, because pot interferes with your motor skills, your thinking, your sensory perception, all of which are indispensible for responsible gun management.

Besides, medical marijuana patients fall into two categories. Most are people who like to get high and are scamming the system, of course they should be disqualified from gun ownership. The minority is people who really need relief from extremely severe physical symptoms of various diseases, which unfortunately, must disqualify them too.

http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

[Davis_X_Machina]

1. Should be good for 300 replies...

...the only two things DU really cares about -- in the same thread!.

[era veteran]

7. LOL

[TheWraith]

2. Unrec for blogspam. And for bullshit.

Marijuana no more interferes with your motor skills and thinking than does alcohol, nor does it have a more lasting effect. I should know, I've tried both. If at all possible you shouldn't do potentially dangerous things while under the influence of recreational chemicals: that includes using a gun, using a car, or blogging.

[mikeb302000]

4. where's the bullshit then?

you sound like you're agreeing with me.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Just about everywhere, starting with your blog flogging

[TheWraith]

15. You imply that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol.

That alone is bullshit.

"People who use medical marijuana should not own guns"

I don't see you suggesting that anyone who has a shot of bourbon in the evening forfeit their right to a firearm. Marijuana affects your cognitive skills TEMPORARILY, not as a full time issue. You are suggesting to treat MM patients using a grossly exaggerated standard of caution that sounds like something pulled out of Reefer Madness, not a principle based on any realistic assessment of someone's mental state. You might as well suggest that no one taking MM be allowed to own a car, because they would be driving under the influence, or care for children, or walk up and down stairs.

[gejohnston]

17. you missed that one

I don't see you suggesting that anyone who has a shot of bourbon in the evening forfeit their right to a firearm.

He did in an earlier post.

[TheWraith]

21. Ah.

So then either he's simply a total fucking moron, or he's just posting flamebaity bullshit here to draw traffic for his blog, or both. I'm betting on option 2.

[mikeb302000]

24. Actually, I don't think pot is worse than booze

why do you make shit up? Isn't what I really do say enough for you to argue with?

[gejohnston]

3. From my understanding

The Gun Control Act of 1968 does prohibit those who use controlled substances. I do know that it is one of the questions on the ATF Form 4473. That makes the whole CCW issue moot, unless the state requires permit for a sword cane or concealed knife. That was the case in Wyoming until Jul. If not, the issue is moot and the county attorney is pissing away tax money.

I have a simpler defense. People who use medical marijuana should not own guns, let alone carry them around, because pot interferes with your motor skills, your thinking, your sensory perception, all of which are indispensable for responsible gun management.

I think it should be legalized, and GCA amended to accommodate, and the same rules that currently apply to alcohol. There is no evidence that this is an issue, and I don't know of any other country has such a law for alcohol. I have a question, are you proposing the same for Italy?

[mikeb302000]

5. there is no evidence, huh?

don't you read the papers? Don't you think for yourself? Can't you put two and two together.

[gejohnston]

8. yes to all three

but no to jumping leaps and bounds to absurd conclusions based an a few paragraphs in a newspaper.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. Indeed there is no evidence that pot using gun owners are a problem

Are you arguing "Reefer Madness"? Perhaps you think that some physical ailments should terminate ones rights. If medical pot users should not own guns, should they be allowed to vote or drive?

[one-eyed fat man]

14. Blaming pot heads for gun crimes? Gimme a break.

Personally, I have little use for either drunks or dopers, but the bulk of the contribution that potheads make to the mess is their financial support of the criminal enterprise that gets them high. They deny it, of course, but as long as anyone wants something someone else says they can't have, someone will strive to fill the desire. In case you hadn't noticed it failed with booze, it is failing with dope, and will fail even if you achieve King Mikey status and get to implement your wettest dream.

Most of the violence associated with the drug trade comes from various retailers and wholesalers squabbling over territory and market share. An organization which can and does build submarines or cross border tunnels sophisticated enough to accommodate fork trucks is not likely to be stymied by any of your proposals anymore than you are going to affect the activities of the Mafia in YOUR neighborhood.

This whole case is going to hinge on the Federal law and state laws conflicting. Even the question on the Form 4473 asks "...Are you an an unlawful user of marijauna..." implying such a thing as a lawful user could exist. It will inter sting to see how the judge splits the baby on this one.

[mikeb302000]

18. I'm thinking more about the guy

who has a gun at home for protection. He gets loaded and cannot function well enough to be responsible with the gun. This appleas even more so to concealed carry people.

Have you ever been in a cop bar? They have them in every city and they're often full of dangerous guys who drink too much and carry guns. The same applies to civilian gun owners.

[one-eyed fat man]

22. Well, hell...

You provide plenty of evidence of of a guy gets loaded and cannot function well enough to be responsible with high speed internet!

Sure there are cop bars, but you were not talking about cop bars. Consider for a moment the laws here in Kentucky on that subject.

244.125 Prohibition against possession of loaded firearm in room where alcoholic beverages are being sold by the drink.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, no person shall be in possession of a loaded, as defined in KRS 237.060, firearm while actually within the room where alcoholic beverages are being sold by the drink of a building on premises licensed to sell distilled spirits and wine at retail by the drink for consumption on the licensed premises pursuant to KRS Chapter 243.

(2) This section shall not apply to the owner manager, or employee of licensed premises, law enforcement officers, or special local peace officers commissioned pursuant to KRS 61.360.

(3) This section shall not apply to a bona fide restaurant open to the general public having dining facilities for not less than fifty (50) persons and which receives at least fifty percent (50%) of its gross annual income from the dining facilities by the sale of food.

(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed as permitting the carrying of a concealed deadly weapon in violation of KRS 527.020.

(5) Any firearm possessed in violation of this section shall be subject to forfeiture and shall be disposed of pursuant to KRS 237.090.

Basically, as applies to civilian gun owners, no loaded guns in saloons, openly or concealed. That would include the "bar area" of a restaurant.

A. Negligent use of a deadly weapon consists of:
(1) discharging a firearm into any building or vehicle or so as to knowingly endanger a person or his property;

(2) carrying a firearm while under the influence of an intoxicant or narcotic;

(3) endangering the safety of another by handling or using a firearm or other deadly weapon in a negligent manner; or

(4) discharging a firearm within one hundred fifty yards of a dwelling or building, not including abandoned or vacated buildings on public lands during hunting seasons, without the permission of the owner or lessees thereof.

So someone carrying a concealed weapon in a restaurant that happens to serve alcohol is fine as long as they are not drinking....or stoned.

You might need a dose of reality as to human nature. Those individuals, who by nature, are responsible, reasoning adults tend to behave sensibly without need for a law. Idiots and assholes tend to be idiots and assholes despite any law, the law only serving as way to exact retribution for their assholishness, after the fact.

Don't drink and drive or toke and tote are useful admonitions but unneeded by those who are disinclined, and ineffective on those who are. I'd wager odds on the broadly, both categories have repeat or habitual offenders. Most drunk drivers are driving on a revoked or suspended license anyway. The guy carrying without a license likely can't get one as he is already a convict. Until Claire Voyantte at the Bureau of Future Crime lets you know who the crooks are ahead of time you will just have to until they make themselves known.

[era veteran]

6. Judgmental?

Your Comment: "Most are people who like to get high and are scamming the system, of course they should be disqualified from gun ownership. The minority is people who really need relief from extremely severe physical symptoms of various diseases, which unfortunately, must disqualify them too."
This is just bullshit. Got some links or is that just your assumption?

There are 3 assholes in Kirch Gons Germany that should be glad I was smoking weed when I caught them breaking in to the Post Office/ Telephone Co offices. There are 2 assholes with the Queen's Own Highlanders that should be glad weed had been smoked. That was along long time ago and in my experience weed smokers would be ok as anybody carrying, much much better than alcohol drinkers.
If you think pot interferes with your motor skills, your thinking, your sensory perception, you do not know of what you write.

[mikeb302000]

19. oh really, let me ask you this.

were you ever stoned while driving and as you approached the turnoff you needed to make at the last minute you were suddenly unsure if it was the right place to turn? Next thing you knew you passed the corner and had to double back?

That is a classic situation of being high on pot while driving. It's harmless and even humorous at times. But that kind of impairment makes you disqualified to have a gun, in my opinion.

[era veteran]

23. no

[pipoman]

9. blog unrec

[Upton]

10. You just make stuff up, huh?.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. More often than not, jumping to conclusions or even outright falsehoods appear to go hand in hand with anti thinking.

Anyway, here's your chance, do you have a link to back up your claim about medical marijuana users: "Most are people who like to get high and are scamming the system"..?

[mikeb302000]

20. go to Denver and check them out n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. Unrec for blogspamming

[AtheistCrusader]

16. I don't know, let me consult my blog.