Owning assault gun, growing pot are immoral, California court says

[dmancornell]

Do you wake up pissed off everyday?

Nah I usually work my way up to it.

 

[fd15k]

I'm confused. If you are legally allowed to grow/consume MJ via a medical card how is this edict from the ATF not in violation of the 2A and the state of CA gun laws?

Because with firearms feds set the bar of minimum regulation, and states are not allowed to loosen it. Feds say guns for druggies is not okay, and no amount of state law can change that. This is the same problem with Firearms Freedom Acts of various states, where again feds dictate the minimum amount of rules for NFA items (states can make more restrictions), and no amount of state law can change that (at least now).

 

[slimmer13]

...

 

[DonovanJay]

grrr.

 

[BlayzinDro]

According to a 21 Sep 2011 "Open Letter to All Federal Firearms Licensees" from ATF, holders of state-issued medical marijuana cards are automatically "prohibited persons" under 18 U.S.C 922(g)(3) and "shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition" by a medical marijuana card holder is a violation.

OSP has no problem with the last 2 guns I bought. If you are legal for both then there is nothing illegal.
Two rights don't make a wrong!

 

[fd15k]

OSP has no problem with the last 2 guns I bought. If you are legal for both then there is nothing illegal.
Two rights don't make a wrong!

This is so funny. You have just admitted to a federal felony on a public forum...

 

[dmancornell]

This is so funny. You have just admitted to a federal felony on a public forum...

Oh noes, somebody call the internet police.

 

[Page.k]

more like he has admitted to 2 federal felony on a public forum. Did you get ammo to go with your guns? If so was it all the same type?

 

[fd15k]

more like he has admitted to 2 federal felony on a public forum. Did you get ammo to go with your guns? If so was it all the same type?

Actually I'm not sure how they count those things But sure thing one is enough to lose one's gun rights completely...

 

[Page.k]

ATF Online - Pressroom - Field Releases (2012) Why not look for some more people getting a little ATF lovin.
We may not like the laws but we have them. So if the laws are so bad why not fight to change them? I'll love to have a few toys that the ATF has taxes on but when I do get them I'll be paying the tax.

 

[Page.k]

It adds up fast one federal felony for each gun or each type of ammo. One 12ga shotgun, one box of slugs and some 00 Buck = three federal felonies>If they push the issue<.

 

[BDA.45]

Didnt our forefathers grow HEMP????? (there is a difference) Just sayin.......The real question is what is a schedule 1 drug??????? Alcohol??? Nicotine??? I really dont see a big push for PROHIBITION now do I??? We should ban all alcohol and all nicotine. I know plenty of gun owners who drink and smoke but according to the feds both of these drugs should be "banned".
The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

"Wow that porter really made my liver feel great, and that Cuban.... Oh MAN my lungs...." Fukin GOVT bulsht. Dont get me started!!!!!

 

[Kevatc]

Because with firearms feds set the bar of minimum regulation, and states are not allowed to loosen it. Feds say guns for druggies is not okay, and no amount of state law can change that. This is the same problem with Firearms Freedom Acts of various states, where again feds dictate the minimum amount of rules for NFA items (states can make more restrictions), and no amount of state law can change that (at least now).

A hypothtical based on fact: I have guns. I also have cancer. I would like to get my MJ card to treat the issues that go along with cancer treatment. So the ATF can tell me I have to get rid of the guns if I want medical MJ?

 

[fd15k]

A hypothtical based on fact: I have guns. I also have cancer. I would like to get my MJ card to treat the issues that go along with cancer treatment. So the ATF can tell me I have to get rid of the guns if I want medical MJ?

Yes, unfortunately.

 

[Akathepriest]

Would you people stop saying assault rifle? It was a Semi-Auto rifle. It wasn't Rambo's m60.

 

[fd15k]

Would you people stop saying assault rifle? It was a Semi-Auto rifle. It wasn't Rambo's m60.

Article in the OP says "Assault Weapon", which is a legal term and is unrelated to the actual firepower

 

[Swedish K]

Shame on you for slamming the guy for the non-crime of owning an "assault rifle" (in commiefornia, anything with a detachable magazine) using the lame and pathetic "it's the law" argument. I feel more sorry for you than I do for him.

not all detachable magazine semi autos fall under the CA AWB. The Mini 14 is not on the list - mostly because Bill Ruger threw his customers rights under the buss and backed the fed AWB (and several state ones) provided his product wasn't on the list - I suppose it increased Ruger sales significantly. essentially the AWB definition relies partly on looks - not functionality.

A hypothtical based on fact: I have guns. I also have cancer. I would like to get my MJ card to treat the issues that go along with cancer treatment. So the ATF can tell me I have to get rid of the guns if I want medical MJ?

Essentially yes - if an FFL knows you have a MJ card they can not sell to you or risk loosing their FFL/business. Also technically the feds don't recognize State's rights to legalize MJ even for medical purposes. Technically I believe the only legal THC form even for medical purposes would be "marinol".


Oh - FYI all - a friend was telling me the other day that CA is trying to pass another law that would make possession of a firearm with a bullet button or even the bullet button parts a felony. No grace period or option to legally register your "assault weapon".

here is part of the info he sent -
If you think it is hard to own and possess a semi-automatic firearm in California now, Senate Bill 249, if enacted, would ban the ownership and possession of AR-15s and other magazine-fed semi-automatic firearms that currently use "bullet buttons" or other tools to restrict the removal of the magazine. This anti-gun bill would also authorize civil and criminal penalties for possessing a "conversion kit!"

in this case conversion kit does not refer to full auto parts but to parts meant to circumvent the AWB by making the magazine a "fixed" magazine.

 

[RB87]

The previous conviction for cultivating marijuana WAS A FELONY.
The 09 unregistered assault weapon conviction WAS/IS A FELONY.
The 09 conviction for cultivating marijuana WAS/IS A FELONY.

Regardless of what law, or being in posession of something that may be legal here, the guy is a friggin career criminal, plain and simple. I won't even feel sorry for him when bubba repeatedly romanticaly rips him while he is picking up the powdered soap.

Kudos for the DA throwing the book at him.

Ahh, the prison rape position. I thought rape was wrong? Some rape is ok? I can see karmic justice in a rapist being raped but I wouldn't think its something we as a society should support on the whole.

 

[eganx]

OSP has no problem with the last 2 guns I bought. If you are legal for both then there is nothing illegal.
Two rights don't make a wrong!

Yeah good luck with that one buddy. There is no such thing as being federally legal for both, as one disqualifies the other. The ATF does watch firearm forums, and with a screen name like "BlayzinDro" your only asking for trouble. Trying to make it less obvious that your committing multiple federal crimes it might be in your best interest.

 

[fd15k]

Oh - FYI all - a friend was telling me the other day that CA is trying to pass another law that would make possession of a firearm with a bullet button or even the bullet button parts a felony. No grace period or option to legally register your "assault weapon".

here is part of the info he sent -
If you think it is hard to own and possess a semi-automatic firearm in California now, Senate Bill 249, if enacted, would ban the ownership and possession of AR-15s and other magazine-fed semi-automatic firearms that currently use "bullet buttons" or other tools to restrict the removal of the magazine. This anti-gun bill would also authorize civil and criminal penalties for possessing a "conversion kit!"

in this case conversion kit does not refer to full auto parts but to parts meant to circumvent the AWB by making the magazine a "fixed" magazine.

That bill is so poorly crafted, that nobody can figure out if "conversion kit" really means "bullet button", or it refers to "mag magnet" tool that attaches on top of BB to make the magazine readily detachable. It is unlikely
that they can ban all semi-automatics with detachable magazines, as there are too many of them already, including in the hands of current and retired LEOs. There is a lot of discussion on the subject on calguns.net, but the bottom line is skies are not falling.