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

Recently we discovered an MCRGO (MICHIGAN COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS) article (https://mcrgo.org/) released together with Ammoland all about medical marijuana and also exactly how it impacts gun ownership and also your concealed carry license. This is a really complex problem, as you can imagine, for a shooting sports news blog to tackle and cover, in full spectrum and with the proper information for the consumer. This article just grazed the surface on the interaction of state and federal law, now that medical marijuana is lawful, and also the relationship between cannabis possession and licensing in Michigan. Much of what was stated is thought-provoking, but not 100% precise, so we made a decision to dispel the inaccuracies and also provide you a valuable overview on your civil liberties as a Michigan citizen.

At the time the article was composed (2016 ), they could not give extremely clear-cut answers considering that much of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act and following advantages of its cardholders, when it involves firearm possession, was still a grey area in both federal and state law. The connection in between the two subjects is very important, since when applying to acquire a weapon, of any variety, you need to fill out the License to Purchase form with the state, according to federal regulation. On this form and also the Concealed Permit License, you need to answer the question referring to possession as well as use cannabis as well as any 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 problem extensively. The legislation states [anyone] "who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" is not qualified for an LTP or cpl, which by reasoning this does not consist of authorized MMC holders, suggesting they are not banned from possessing a gun or ammunition. Considering that this phrasing permits people that are following lawfully under state regulation, it can be suggested there need to be no obstacle to owning a weapon as well as holding a medical marijuana card at the same time. It can also be suggested that simply by having the card does not imply you are in possession of or using cannabis as well as it's subsequent products.

To be clear 922( g)( 3) is a governing law, yet it has subsequent amendments that ought to not be ignored. In particular 922( d)( 3 ), which deals directly with the sale of weapons, not just the screening process, and it includes the clarifying phrase "having reasonable cause". This provision is something that (g)( 3) does not add, better clouding the subject. This distinction might not stand apart as a big difficulty, however it is essential in the argument whether or whether not MMMA card holders are eligible to hold a CCP.

In the short article, by Ammoland and 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 pointed out before this is not an outright fact, however in 2011 the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) released an open letter describing how statues 922( d) and also 922( g) correlate, and also are defined referring to states with legalized marijuana. Their position is, as a federally licensed firearm dealer, the dealer might not offer to anybody that is recognized to or in fact does possess a medical marijuana card, as this is reasonable cause, therefore the buyer is disqualified according to 922( d). This is not to state they advised that cardholders not be able to lawfully have a weapon, since 922( g) does not consist of such a provision, but it does ensure that the purchase and sale of a gun would be frowned upon, if not considered an offense.

As the best scenario and case law we can provide, right now, we then checked into the judgment of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This instance took place back in August 2016, however their judgment is sound, an adequate explanation of the gaps the statues leave. The situation was Wilson v. Lynch, during which the 9th Circuit ruled opposing the ATF's open letter from 2011. The Court stated "Title 18 U.S.C. § 922( d)( 3 ), 27 C.F.R. § 478.11, and 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 more opinion, through process or conjecture, however is now ruling case law.

Fundamentally, it is the fundamental difference that comes into play when acquiring weapons and ammo, 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) relating to the sale, not possession, and simply to cardholders that are not users. This is why the federal form 4473, which covers the use and also possession of cannabis as well as other controlled substances is still in use. So, if you are planning on getting a license, apply for ones that just need to abide by state law and not federal, since federal law calls for compliance with all statues.

Michigan law specifically lays out the precise criteria you require to meet to be determined worthy of a License to Purchase a pistol or a CPL, the statues they follow are MCL 28.422 as well as MCL 28.425 b, specifically. The reason we recommend to only apply on a state level versus a federal level is that neither 28.422 or 28.425 b have language similar to the federal statutes, as well as neither have restrictive requirements for MMC holders. If you are not guilty of violating any controlled substance laws, which would certainly after that make you ineligible for holding a medical marijuana card too, you are eligible for gun ownership.

One more part of the (https://mcrgo.org/) article we intend 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.

Finally, the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MCL 333.26424) secures cardholders under section 4 from ever being "denied any right or privilege," and considering that gun ownership is a constitutional right, they can never overturn that right. To explain further, 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 implies that the Michigan licensing authority is statutorily restricted from refuting a cardholder a License to Purchase a pistol or obtaining a concealed permit license.

In Summary The Key Points:

The Federal legislations that govern firearm sale as well as possession are 922(d) (sales) as well as (922(g)(possession).

Both Federal statutes consist of various criteria, as well as the 9th Circuit cleared up the 'grey' area during the Wilson v. Lynch case in 2016.

The present understanding of the Federal law is understood in such a way as to prohibit the sale of weapons to MMMA cardholders if the seller has knowledge of the card.

Federal legislation does not have the authority to restrict possession of firearms for people who just have an MMMA card, yet are not utilizing.

Given that applying for LTP and also CPL are state-based application they do not require to respond to the cannabis and controlled substance question.

State regulation prevents Michigan authorities from refuting any kind of legal rights or opportunities, such as possessing and also acquiring a firearm, to cardholders.

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