Legal Overview to Having a Medical Marijuana Card and Also Getting A Concealed Permit or License to Purchase a Gun

Recently we discovered an MCRGO (MICHIGAN COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS) article (https://mcrgo.org/) released in conjunction with Ammoland all about medical cannabis as well as just how it impacts weapon possession and your concealed carry license. This is a very challenging issue, as you can imagine, for a shooting sports news blog to tackle and cover, in full spectrum as well as with the correct information for the customer. This article just grazed the surface on the interaction of state and federal law, now that medical cannabis is legal, and also the connection in between marijuana possession and licensing in Michigan. Much of what was claimed is thought-provoking, but not 100% exact, so we chose to eliminate the mistakes as well as offer you a beneficial guide on your civil liberties as a Michigan resident.

At the time the write-up was composed (2016 ), they could not provide really conclusive answers because much of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act as well as following benefits of its cardholders, when it involves gun possession, was still a grey area in both federal and also state legislation. The correlation in between both subjects is extremely important, because when applying to purchase a weapon, of any variety, you have to complete the License to Purchase form with the state, according to federal regulation. On this form and also the Concealed Permit License, you have to answer the question concerning possession and also use marijuana and also any type of various other controlled substances like it. We believe there is some help from federal statute 18 U.S.C. § 922( g)( 3) pertaining to licenses as well as possession, yet it still does not make clear the issue completely. The regulation mentions [anyone] "who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" is not eligible for an LTP or CPL, which by reasoning this does not include lawful MMC owners, suggesting they are not banned from having a weapon or ammo. Since this wording allows for people that are following legally under state legislation, it can be suggested there ought to be no obstacle to having a weapon and holding a medical marijuana card simultaneously. It can likewise be argued that simply by having the card does not imply you are in possession of or using marijuana and it's subsequent products.

To be clear 922( g)( 3) is a governing law, however it has subsequent amendments that ought to not be ignored. Particularly 922( d)( 3 ), which deals directly with the sale of firearms, not simply the screening process, as well as it includes the clarifying phrase "having reasonable cause". This stipulation is something that (g)( 3) does not add, further clouding the topic. This difference may not stand out as a huge hurdle, yet it is critical in the argument whether or whether not MMMA card holders are eligible to hold a CCP.

In the write-up, by Ammoland as well as 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 mentioned before this is not an absolute reality, yet in 2011 the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) released an open letter explaining how statues 922( d) and also 922( g) associate, as well as are specified relating to states with legalized cannabis. Their position is, as a federally licensed firearm dealer, the dealer might not market to anybody that is known to or actually does have a medical marijuana card, as this is reasonable cause, and so the buyer is ineligible according to 922( d). This is not to say they advised that cardholders not be able to lawfully have a firearm, since 922( g) does not have such a stipulation, but it does make certain that the purchase and also sale of a weapon would be frowned upon, if not considered an infraction.

As the best scenario and case law we can provide, currently, we then checked out the judgment of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This instance happened back in August 2016, but their verdict 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, as well as 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, yet is currently ruling case law.

Basically, it is the basic difference that comes into play when purchasing weapons and ammunition, not in the possession of weapons. The above ruling is narrow in its application, in a sense, it only applies to federal law (not state law) connecting to the sale, not possession, and just to cardholders that are not users. This is why the federal form 4473, which covers the usage and also possession of cannabis and also other controlled substances is still in use. So, if you are intending on obtaining a permit, apply for ones that only have to adhere to state law and not federal, since federal law calls for compliance with all statues.

Michigan law specifically lays out the exact requirements you require to satisfy to be determined worthy of a License to Purchase a pistol or a CPL, the statues they adhere to are MCL 28.422 and MCL 28.425 b, respectively. The reason we suggest to just apply on a state level versus a federal level is that neither 28.422 or 28.425 b contain language comparable to the federal statutes, as well as neither have restrictive needs for MMC holders. If you are not guilty of violating any controlled substance laws, which would after that make you disqualified for holding a medical marijuana card too, you are eligible for gun ownership.

One more part of the (https://mcrgo.org/) short article we wish to cover, that is not exact, is the fact that state licensing needs a NICS background check and hence that federal laws still need to be adhered to. This is inaccurate and false because state licensing for medical marijuana is not included in the NICS search of your background. Once again your right to purchase is under scrutiny pertaining to the Wilson ruling, not your right to possess and own a firearm.

Lastly, the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MCL 333.26424) protects cardholders under section 4 from ever being "denied any right or privilege," and considering that weapon ownership is a constitutional right, they can never rescind that right. To describe better, 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 denying a cardholder a License to Purchase a pistol or obtaining a concealed permit license.

In Recap The Key Points:

The Federal laws that control firearm sale and possession are 922(d) (sales) as well as (922(g)(possession).

Both Federal statutes include various standards, and also the 9th Circuit clarified the 'grey' area during the Wilson v. Lynch case in 2016.

The current understanding of the Federal regulation is construed in such a way as to forbid the sale of firearms to MMMA cardholders if the seller has knowledge of the card.

Federal law does not have the authority to ban possession of weapons for individuals who simply have an MMMA card, yet are not utilizing.

Because getting LTP and CPL are state-based application they do not require to answer the marijuana and controlled substance question.

State regulation prevents Michigan authorities from denying any kind of civil liberties or advantages, such as possessing and purchasing a firearm, to cardholders.

Bottom line: when someone calls our office to ask if as an MMMA cardholder if it is still lawful for them to acquire and possess guns the answer is Yes! Yes, you can, it is your right, and you have the ability to exercise that.