Recently we discovered an MCRGO (MICHIGAN COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS) article (https://mcrgo.org/) published combined with Ammoland all about medical marijuana as well as exactly how it influences gun ownership as well as your concealed carry license. This is an extremely complicated issue, as you can imagine, for a shooting sports news blog to tackle and cover, in full spectrum and with the correct information for the customer. This post just grazed the surface on the interaction of state and federal law, now that medical marijuana is legal, and also the connection in between marijuana possession and licensing in Michigan. Much of what was stated is thought-provoking, yet not 100% exact, so we chose to resolve the mistakes and also give you a beneficial guide on your civil liberties as a Michigan citizen.
At the time the short article was created (2016 ), they could not provide very conclusive answers given that much of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act and also adhering to benefits of its cardholders, when it pertains to gun possession, was still a gray area in both federal and also state legislation. The connection in between the two topics is really vital, because when applying to purchase a gun, of any type of variety, you need to fill out the License to Purchase form with the state, according to federal law. On this form as well as the Concealed Permit License, you have to answer the question concerning possession and use marijuana as well as any type of other controlled substances like it. We believe there is some aid from federal statute 18 U.S.C. § 922( g)( 3) relating to licenses as well as possession, but it still does not clear up the concern extensively. The law states [anyone] "who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" is not qualified for an LTP or CPL, which by reasoning this does not consist of legal MMC owners, suggesting they are not forbidden from having a firearm or ammo. Because this wording allows for individuals that are following lawfully under state legislation, it can be suggested there ought to be no barrier to owning a weapon and holding a medical marijuana card simultaneously. It can also be argued that just by possessing the card does not suggest you are in possession of or using cannabis as well as it's subsequent products.
To be clear 922( g)( 3) is a governing law, however it has subsequent amendments that must not be neglected. Particularly 922( d)( 3 ), which deals directly with the sale of guns, not simply the screening process, and it includes the clarifying phrase "having reasonable cause". This clause is something that (g)( 3) does not include, additionally clouding the subject. This distinction might not stand apart as a large hurdle, but it is vital in the debate whether or whether not MMMA card holders are eligible to hold a CCP.
In the write-up, by Ammoland and MCGRO, they state "The ATF takes the position that anyone with an MMMA card is probably using and therefore not allowed to possess a firearm." As pointed out before this is not an absolute truth, but in 2011 the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) released an open letter clarifying exactly how statues 922( d) as well as 922( g) correlate, as well as are defined concerning states with legalized marijuana. Their stance is, as a federally licensed firearm dealer, the dealership may not sell to anybody that is recognized to or as a matter of fact does have a medical marijuana card, as this is reasonable cause, therefore the buyer is ineligible according to 922( d). This is not to say they instructed that cardholders not have the ability to lawfully have a firearm, because 922( g) does not include such a clause, but it does guarantee that the acquisition as well as sale of a gun would certainly be frowned upon, otherwise considered an infraction.
As the best scenario and case legislation we can present, right now, we after that checked out the ruling of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This situation happened back in August 2016, but their judgment is sound, a sufficient description of the spaces the statues leave. The instance was Wilson v. Lynch, during which the 9th Circuit ruled opposing the ATF's open letter from 2011. The Court said "Title 18 U.S.C. § 922( d)( 3 ), 27 C.F.R. § 478.11, and the Open Letter bar only the sale of firearms to Wilson-- not her possession of firearms." As this is a ruling from a circuit court, this is no longer opinion, through process or conjecture, but is currently ruling case law.
Essentially, it is the essential difference that comes into play when buying weapons as well as ammunition, not in the possession of firearms. The above ruling is narrow in its application, in a sense, it only applies to federal law (not state law) associating with the sale, not possession, and also simply to cardholders who are not users. This is why the federal form 4473, which covers the usage and possession of cannabis and also other controlled substances is still in use. So, if you are planning on obtaining a license, apply for ones that just have to adhere to state law and not federal, due to the fact that federal law needs compliance with all statues.
Michigan law specifically lays out the precise criteria you require to fulfill to be determined worthy of a License to Purchase a pistol or a CPL, the statues they adhere to are MCL 28.422 as well as MCL 28.425 b, specifically. The factor we advise to only apply on a state level versus a federal level is that neither 28.422 or 28.425 b include language comparable to the federal statutes, and neither have restrictive needs for MMC holders. If you are not guilty of violating any controlled substance laws, which would then make you ineligible for holding a medical marijuana card also, you are eligible for firearm ownership.
One more component of the (https://mcrgo.org/) short article we intend to cover, that is not precise, is the fact that state licensing requires a NICS background check and hence that federal laws still need to be followed. This is inaccurate and false because state licensing for medical marijuana is not included in the NICS search of your background. Once more your right to purchase is under scrutiny pertaining to the Wilson ruling, not your right to possess and own a firearm.
Ultimately, the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MCL 333.26424) protects cardholders under section 4 from ever being "denied any right or privilege," and considering that gun ownership is a constitutional right, they can never rescind that right. To describe even more, the Act is initiated law, which means it can not be repealed, preempted, or modified without a supermajority (75% of the house and senate). This indicates that the Michigan licensing authority is statutorily forbidden from rejecting a cardholder a License to Purchase a pistol or obtaining a concealed permit license.
In Summary The Key Points:
The Federal laws that regulate gun sale and possession are 922(d) (sales) and also (922(g)(possession).
Both Federal statutes consist of various standards, as well as the 9th Circuit made clear the 'grey' area during the Wilson v. Lynch case in 2016.
The present understanding of the Federal regulation is taken in such a way as to ban the sale of firearms to MMMA cardholders if the seller has knowledge of the card.
Federal regulation does not have the authority to ban possession of firearms for people that simply have an MMMA card, yet are not utilizing.
Considering that requesting LTP as well as CPL are state-based application they do not require to address the marijuana and controlled substance question.
State legislation prevents Michigan authorities from denying any rights or advantages, such as possessing and also acquiring a firearm, to cardholders.
Bottom line: when a person calls our office to ask if as an MMMA cardholder if it is still legal for them to buy as well as possess weapons the answer is Yes! Yes, you can, it is your right, and you have the ability to exercise that.
No comments:
Post a Comment