PDA

View Full Version : Using medical pot bars gun?


becky420
05-29-2008, 09:00 AM
Using medical pot bars gun?

Thursday, May 29, 2008

The Oregonian
Washington County plans to appeal a judge's decision ordering Sheriff Rob Gordon to grant concealed weapons permits to three men who lost them because they are medical marijuana users.

Sheriff's officials say they need clarification on whether federal law prohibiting illegal drug users from possessing handguns trumps state law, which allows Oregonians to legally smoke marijuana to treat pain.

The county also wants to make sure it won't be liable if a medical marijuana user receives a weapons permit and then commits a crime with the weapon.

"We're trying to get a ruling from the courts to tell us what to do on this," Cmdr. Willie Bose said.

Leland Berger, an attorney for the men who prevailed in a May 15 decision, said the law is clear on the issue.

"Why is the sheriff only discriminating against sick and dying people?" Berger said. "What the heck is that?"

County lawyers expect other Oregon counties to follow the issue closely. Just this week, a Jackson County Circuit judge ordered Sheriff Mike Winters to renew the concealed handgun license of a woman who said she is a medical marijuana user.

Washington County judges have ruled against the sheriff's office on the issue in the past, including a 2005 case involving Steven Schwerdt. The Beaverton-area man also is one of the three complainants who prevailed in the May 15 decision from Washington County Circuit Judge Steven L. Price.

In the 2005 case, Gordon took away Schwerdt's permit when Schwerdt indicated on a concealed handgun change-of-address form that he had a medical marijuana card and frequently used the drug. Past forms used by the sheriff's office did not ask about drug use.

In that case, the county decided not to appeal because it was not clear that Schwerdt possessed a handgun at the time, County Counsel Dan Olsen said.

Under the federal law that Gordon is following, someone using an illegal drug -- which includes pot -- is not permitted to possess a firearm. State law doesn't address the issue of using illegal drugs and possessing a firearm unless someone has a drug conviction, Olsen said.

"The question is whether there's a conflict between federal and state laws and whether federal law pre-empts state law," Olsen said.

Oregon voters approved physician-approved medical marijuana in 1998.

In the recent case, Schwerdt, Paul Sansone and Lee Wallick challenged the sheriff's office decision to deny them concealed handgun permits because they use marijuana for pain relief.

Price ordered Gordon to grant handgun licenses to all three men.

County lawyers expect to get formal approval from the Washington County Board of Commissioners next week to pursue the issue before the Oregon Court of Appeals. Olsen expects the appeals process could take a year.

In the meantime, new applications for concealed weapons permits are on hold at the sheriff's office, Bose said. Nine permits have been revoked since August, he said.

"We'd like to have a decision sooner rather than later so we know where to go on this issue," he said.

CB
05-29-2008, 11:13 AM
FFF


they can have mine when they pry them from my cold dead hands

:mad3:


just do like me and lie to em.... IMO it's none of there business what i put in my body

EASY
05-29-2008, 02:45 PM
Between the wolves, gun laws and this Wyoming is tired of the feds.

http://infohack.newsvine.com/_news/2007/02/24/584050-wyoming-sheriffs-put-feds-in-their-place
February 18th, 2007

Here’s one the mainstream media isn’t going to tell you: County sheriffs in Wyoming are demanding that federal agents actually abide by the Constitution, or face arrest. Even better, a U.S. District Court agreed according to the Keene Free Press:

The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF and the IRS by Mattis and other members of the Wyoming Sheriff’s Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.

Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.” Go back and re-read this quote.

The court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official.” And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and buried — not in Wyoming, not yet.

Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis comments:

“If a sheriff doesn’t want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to leave, or retain them in custody.”

“I am reacting in response to the actions of federal employees who have attempted to deprive citizens of my county of their privacy, their liberty, and their property without regard to constitutional safeguards. I hope that more sheriffs all across America will join us in protecting their citizens from the illegal activities of the IRS, EPA, BATF, FBI, or any other federal agency that is operating outside the confines of constitutional law. Employees of the IRS and the EPA are no longer welcome in Bighorn County unless they intend to operate in conformance to constitutional law.”

The implications are huge:

But it gets even better. Since the judge stated that the sheriff “has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official,” the Wyoming sheriffs are flexing their muscles. They are demanding access to all BATF files. Why? So as to verify that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibits the registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm owners. This would be wrong.

The sheriffs are also demanding that federal agencies immediately cease the seizure of private property and the impoundment of private bank accounts without regard to due process in Wyoming state courts.

This case is not just some amusing mountain melodrama. This is a BIG deal. This case is yet further evidence that the 10th Amendment is not yet totally dead, or in a complete decay in the United States. It is also significant in that it can, may, and hopefully will be interpreted to mean that “political subdivisions of a State are included within the meaning of the amendment, or that the powers exercised by a sheriff are an extension of those common law powers which the 10th Amendment explicitly reserves to the People, if they are not granted to the federal government or specifically prohibited to the States.”

becky420
05-30-2008, 12:44 AM
I would be more scared if a meth user had a gun...

Dawg
05-30-2008, 07:22 AM
Be honest I wondered when this would come up. I thought only if they are a CONVICTED felon do they lose the right to bear arms. So even if a med. card holder they should have the right to there CWP.
But like CB said...my cold dead hand ;)
CWP or no this old dawg will have his lil carry on him at all times LOL

EASY
05-30-2008, 08:00 AM
I would be more scared if a meth user had a gun...
heee hee.. me too. I'd be more scared of a 'meth user' with a flyswatter!! :p