Oregon Appeals Court Ruling on CHL & Medical Marijuana Use

[ZachS]

Hot off the presses:

Willis v. Winters
Decided: June 16, 2010
Case No.: A139875
Wollheim, P.J. for the Court; Brewer, C.J.; & Sercombe, J.
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A139875.htm

Oregon’s concealed handgun licensing statutes are not preempted by the federal Gun Control Act as they only exempt the licensee from criminal liability; they do not affirmatively authorize an unlawful controlled substance user to possess handguns.

Sheriff Winters refused to issue a concealed handgun license to Willis, a regular user of marijuana pursuant to a medical marijuana card issued by her physician, even though she met all of the requirements pursuant to the relevant Oregon statutes. Sheriff Winters argued that federal law preempted the Oregon statutes. Sheriff Winters also argued that requiring him to issue a license would force him to violate the federal Gun Control Act, since the license could be construed as a statement that would mislead firearm dealers. The Court of Appeals held the Oregon state law did not affirmatively authorize Willis to violate federal law, but only allowed an exemption from criminal liability. Because there is no direct conflict between the Oregon concealed handgun licensing statutes and the federal Gun Control Act, the sheriff is not being forced to violate federal law by issuing a concealed handgun license to an unlawful controlled substance user. Affirmed.

(Case summary from Willamette University College of Law)

In English, the court ruled that county sheriffs can't refuse to issue a CHL just because an applicant has a medical marijuana card and uses it.

Read More

 

[The B]

awesome. i'm no marihuana user, nor do i condone it's usage, but it's your (ambiguous) prerogative if you want to.

 

[Trlsmn]

Far out maaaan!

 

[Member 5605]

Grooovy...

Still makes one wonder.. the form.. since it's federal

 

[willseeker]

Pass the bong!:drugs:








Will

 

[Gunner3456]

I hate that crap. I tried it once decades ago and all I got was one puff and then I choked and coughed the rest of the day.

Oh, was I supposed to puff on the weed and not the gun powder?

No, seriously, I hate that crap.

 

[ZachS]

I hate that crap. I tried it once decades ago and all I got was one puff and then I choked and coughed the rest of the day.

Oh, was I supposed to puff on the weed and not the gun powder?

No, seriously, I hate that crap.

That makes sense.... I've always thought of you as more of an LSD guy...

 

[Gunner3456]

That makes sense.... I've always thought of you as more of an LSD guy...

That's both of us.

I have a Limited Slip Differential in my pickup.

You are officially in the Law Student Division of the ABA.

That was what you meant, right?

 

[ZachS]

That's both of us.

I have a Limited Slip Differential in my pickup.

You are officially in the Law Student Division of the ABA.

That was what you meant, right?

Um, yeah....

 

[Jamie6.5]

Great. The court endorses "impaired carry." :huh:

 

[ZachS]

Great. The court endorses "impaired carry." :huh:

Show me in the opinion where the court endorsed anything of the sort. Even if they did, it's already legal in for medical marijuana card holders to possess and use firearms while they're stoned. Stupid, but legal.

The court did not endorse any such behavior, just stated that there is no law against it. It correctly ruled that a county sheriff is unable to deny a citizen a legal right because of his own personal biases. If you don't like it, call your state rep. This decision could easily be overruled by a new CHL statute.

 

[Martini_Up]

Great. The court endorses "impaired carry." :huh:

No, it endorses that a fundamental right isn't forfeited because you have a state government issued card granting you another right.

 

[theorren]

Great. The court endorses "impaired carry." :huh:

That's like saying they endorse drunken carry because you're allowed to drink alcohol.
------------------------
Here's more on it.

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100617/NEWS/6170328

 

[Gunner3456]

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100617/NEWS/6170328

That says that the original decision was by judge Mark Schiveley. He's the best judge we have because he's the most likely to follow the law instead of inserting his prejudices and writing new law.

It's OK to have a CHL and be able to buy alcohol. It's OK to have a CHL and be able to legally buy pot. What's the difference?

No where do I see where he endorsed drunken or stoned concealed carry or gun use. He simply ruled that one right doesn't cancel another right.

I think he was right and I think the upholding by the appellate court was right too. This is about strict interpretation of the law, not about a popularity contest or a public opinion poll.

NOW go before him having done something illegal with your gun while drunk or stoned and see what happens. He'll throw the book at you.

 

[Generator]

It's OK to have a CHL and be able to buy alcohol. It's OK to have a CHL and be able to legally buy pot. What's the difference?

The difference is some people get angry and violent when drinking.

Some people get angry while stoned - angry that they didn't buy enough Taco Bell earlier, and then they forget what Taco Bell is, and eat anything in the fridge and find out that C-Span is interesting when you are high.

And no I don't smoke, I have, many years ago, but I think that its a lot more harmless than Alcohol....

 

[huntpotter]

If they can issue a CHL to a guy who is blasted on 5 kinds of pain pills, legally prescribed, by his Dr., Then they should be able to issue a CHL to a legally prescribed pot user. You don't have to agree with the morals of drug use, to be fair with the laws. Sometimes herbal medicine is a valid treatment, and I wouldn't want to be excluded the right to protect myself, if I was one of these patients.

 

[absoluterik07]

I also agree that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana but I don't believe that you should be handling while using either. Great thread ZachS this should get some good debate going!

 

[ZachS]

I also agree that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana but I don't believe that you should be handling while using either. Great thread ZachS this should get some good debate going!

Unfortunately, you missed the debate - but it definitely was a good one!

 

[Generator]

I also agree that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana but I don't believe that you should be handling while using either. Great thread ZachS this should get some good debate going!

Agreed,
and ZachS, we have dragged this away from the original point. you were right.

If they can issue a CHL to a guy who is blasted on 5 kinds of pain pills, legally prescribed, by his Dr., Then they should be able to issue a CHL to a legally prescribed pot user. You don't have to agree with the morals of drug use, to be fair with the laws. Sometimes herbal medicine is a valid treatment, and I wouldn't want to be excluded the right to protect myself, if I was one of these patients.

This opinion is spot on. My wife works for 4 doctors, and they hold back the narcs as much as possible. But prescription drugs are easy to get, legal and at 4:45 on Friday, until she leaves, the phone rings with legal "Junkies"

And there are an Equal number of sick, terrified people who use pain management pills the way/# that they are prescribed, not by the handful.

no one should handle a firearm while legally drunk, over the legal limit, stoned or on a ton of vicodin (ummm duh)... luckily it doesn't happen to often.
I do tech work for TV news, I've heard about every minor gun incident in the last 3 years, and there really aren't enough to vilify guns in any way.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

*golf clap*