Surrender Your Guns, Police Tell Hawaiian Medical Marijuana Patients

a reply to: TinySickTears

Courts, yes, but don't expect help from the judicial branch.

One solution to government overreach is the too seldom used Jury Nullification. I hate to use the term "awareness campaign", but start one to inform people that they are under no obligation to convict anyone of any crime if they are sitting in a jury. Of course, you can't have people signing petitions for that sort of thing.

But make it well known to cops and prosecutors that no one will be convicted by a jury of killing a cop if they are trying to confiscate guns. If just a third of the potential jury pool could be convinced to follow this policy, cops would think twice before trying to confiscate guns.

If successful, this sort of plan could expand nationwide to include other criminal actions committed by cops. A person on trial for killing a cop attempting a Civil Asset Forfeiture - not guilty. A cop shot dead for killing an unarmed man - the defendant is found not guilty. A cop killed while performing an illegal arrest - not guilty.

I think after a few cop killers are set free by juries, things would start to change.

I believe jury nullification stands a better chance of bringing about a positive change than football players taking a knee or anything BLM has tried.

a reply to: ShadeWolf

Good point...but many of these marijuana users are currently using it it for medical reasons and probably WERE NOT users at the time they filed their ATF form. Some states are allowing marijuana use for medical reasons, because studies show it benefits people suffering from chronic pain, PTSD, or debilitating tremors. More states will probably allow medical marijuana use, as time goes on. If marijuana is being prescribed by doctors, to be used by their patients, why should the Federal government treat these people like criminals? As long as these people are not felons, owning guns is their constitutional right in this country. If more and more states are allowing medical marijuana use, then this issue is going to cause major problems. Like someone already posted, this is nothing more than a ploy by our government to confiscate firearms and "demonize" medical marijuana users. Like I stated, the law needs to be changed. Alcohol is just as addicting and IMO, more dangerous than pot....why then isn't alcohol on the Feds "prohibit" list?

I wonder if this will finally make leftists understand why activist judges re-interpreting the Constitution is a bad idea.

originally posted by: TheLotLizard

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Since you can also fire that ammo -that you're not allowed to have- using a vice and a hammer, maybe vices and hammers need to be turned in too...

Firing a bullet without the barrel is nearly harmless. It’s not going to have enough velocity to do any damage. Nice try though.

Unless you're willing to stand in front of a bullet fired in such a manner, his point is perfectly valid.

Surrender Your Guns, Police Tell Hawaiian Medical Marijuana Patients

I guess that why they want drugs legalized.

Completely end run around the Bill of Rights.

You can kill yourself with drugs, but no boom sticks for you.

originally posted by: projectvxn
Where is the legality in this?

Let me get this straight:

Hawaii wanted to circumvent the federal government due to it's scheduling of marijuana, and then legalize the recreational use of marijuana, only to turn around and give legitimacy to the federal scheduling of marijuana by using it to go after people who are DOING NOTHING ILLEGAL UNDER STATE LAW, and exercising their rights under the Constitution of the United States AND Section 17 of the Hawaii constitution, which lifts the text of the second amendment verbatim.

Liberals.

This isn't liberals... this is hawaii... that place doesn't make much sense in general

a reply to: neo96

I have argued that "medical marijuana" would bite the public int he ass. This is just one example. If the Federal Government moves Marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II or Schedule III, what that does is turn a simple possession of marijuana charge (a class B misdemeanor) into a Felony "Possession of a Controlled Substance" charge.

Any excuse to rid you of your second amendment rights. This is just another reason why you have these rights as an American so as not to become a slave to criminals.
a reply to: shawmanfromny

a reply to: Phage

So, just good ol' political corruption with a leavening of family angst?

...and (to get back on topic) the new one is a "gun-grabbing" jerk?

Los Angeles Police Chiefs got noting on Hawaii Five-O...

a reply to: shawmanfromny
This is how the liberals have decided to get your guns. Nothing else has worked but this one might. If you use pot for medical purposes or they prove you use it for recreation they will take your guns.
Backdoor gun control, the liberal dream!!

a reply to: HunkaHunka

This isn't liberals.

Yes it is.

Anywhere there's a restriction on guns a liberal is behind it.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

1) As long as no information about the condition for which marijuana is prescribed is given, there is not necessarily a violation.

2) Well, implied consent works for alcohol roadblocks. Different, I know. But still.

3) Maybe. Or else it will go to court. Which, in Hawaii, would be interesting.

Im pretty sure that if my wife, as a licensed nurse in the state of Texas, breached trust by mentioning a patients viagra, or acyclovir (a herpes drug), she would risk losing her license as well as a personal lawsuit.

HIPPA protects any part of the medical record. If the conflict is that its state licensing....then the problem is the state government interjecting themselves into medical care. But rights are rights.

The whole medical marijuana deal is going to be a big mess to work out. Its ridiculous, to be honest. The biggest winner in the illegality of marijuana? Private prisons, and states that are deep into contracts with occupancy penalties.

I posted this link on the top of page two.
State of Hawaii, Department of Health Medical Cannabis Program

Hawaii law requires all qualified patients to be registered with the Medical Cannabis Registry Program before they begin to use cannabis for medicinal purposes.
...
The Department of Health is also required to provide law enforcement officials with limited access to the Medical Cannabis Registry Program’s data base as a tool to safeguard the community against illegal cannabis use and/or illegal cannabis grow sites.

As I stated in my previous post I feel that this is local government overstepping on citizen's rights, in this case privacy. Perhaps, as you state, this is a violation of HIPAA laws since it is the Hawaii State Department of Heath that are requiring patients to register. Seems the language on that site is clear that disclosing information is for the purpose "to safeguard the community against illegal cannabis use and/or illegal cannabis grow sites." I strongly feel this needs to be challenged.

originally posted by: ShadeWolf
a reply to: Blaine91555

What they're getting marijuana users for isn't necessarily owning guns while having a marijuana card, it's for lying on the Form 4473 (the ATF form filed to transfer a gun from a FFL holder to whoever). There's a specific section regarding illegal drug use, and since marijuana is still federally illegal, it's a fairly major crime to file a 4473 denying drug use while being in possession.

The problem is proving the applicant was using cannabis at the time of applying. If they were stoned while filing out the form then you would have a point. What about those that no longer use? Does this mean that gun owners can never use cannabis legally? How about cannabis card holders that don't use or stopped using? How do we differentiate here?

a reply to: Devino

Fantastic point.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: neo96

I have argued that "medical marijuana" would bite the public int he ass. This is just one example. If the Federal Government moves Marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II or Schedule III, what that does is turn a simple possession of marijuana charge (a class B misdemeanor) into a Felony "Possession of a Controlled Substance" charge.

I have believed in the past that cannabis should be rescheduled as it clearly does not fit in the list of Schedule I controlled substances. However I don't think this is enough. Perhaps end prohibition and/or declassify it as a controlled substance like alcohol and tobacco.

The term "controlled substance" means a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of part B of this subchapter. The term does not include distilled spirits, wine, malt beverages, or tobacco, as those terms are defined or used in subtitle E of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

Wiki

Interesting it looks like even Canadians will be able to own hand guns and posses weed legally next year and Americans won't, that seems pretty crazy.

originally posted by: Devino

originally posted by: ShadeWolf
a reply to: Blaine91555

What they're getting marijuana users for isn't necessarily owning guns while having a marijuana card, it's for lying on the Form 4473 (the ATF form filed to transfer a gun from a FFL holder to whoever). There's a specific section regarding illegal drug use, and since marijuana is still federally illegal, it's a fairly major crime to file a 4473 denying drug use while being in possession.

The problem is proving the applicant was using cannabis at the time of applying. If they were stoned while filing out the form then you would have a point. What about those that no longer use? Does this mean that gun owners can never use cannabis legally? How about cannabis card holders that don't use or stopped using? How do we differentiate here?

Where it should fall apart is medical mj prescriptions have to be renewed each year. So why can't someone go out and buy guns between renewals? Until they renew they would not be medical mj users or patients. Hell, having a medical mj prescription does not equate to being a user, just as having a driver's license does not equate to actually driving a car.

And I see nothing in the law stating if you have guns you can't apply for a medical mj prescription. Nor do I see anything in the law stating you cannot buy guns when not a medical mj user. The law says you cannot buy guns while a medical mj patient and that is generally a period of 6 or 12 months.

Therefor Hawaii's actions are illegal.

a reply to: Phage


Phage, as a practical matter I agree with what you are saying. I just can't think of a worse way to erode our rights than turning the reigns over to government for the purpose of regulation. Even healthcare providers (like EMTs and Paramedics) are regulated by the private organization known as NREMT.

Why can't regulation occur by legitimate private organizations and individuals?

a reply to: shawmanfromny

This coming from Hawaii...

The irony that Democrats will pass a legalize marijuana law only to turn around and use federal gun control laws to illegally disarm the population.

Keep an eye on other states who legalized marijuana and see if they try the same thing as Hawaii is doing with gun confiscation.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Phage


Phage, as a practical matter I agree with what you are saying. I just can't think of a worse way to erode our rights than turning the reigns over to government for the purpose of regulation. Even healthcare providers (like EMTs and Paramedics) are regulated by the private organization known as NREMT.

Why can't regulation occur by legitimate private organizations and individuals?

Because the states are "supposedly" responsible for the medical profession within their own borders. The CSA was never intended to be used in the manner it has been. It was never intended to supplant the states authority to regulate medicine within their own borders.

That concept is reinforced by the fact a paramedic in one state has to hold differing certifications if they are based in an area where their job could bring them across a state line. It is why emergency preparation has a federal influence so the federal government can essentially federalize medical staff as a means to bypass state law requirements. This was used in Louisiana after Katrina and after the F5 tornado that ripped through Joplin Mo.