TTAG Morning Digest: Marijuana Patients’ Gun Rights, The NRA’s Dream Bill and Oh, Canada

Why doesn't the NRA care about marijuana patients' gun rights?

courtesy High Times

The latest argument against gun registration . . . Hey, NRA! What About Patients’ Gun Rights?

So, Hawaii isn’t taking patients’ gun rights because Hawaii believes medical marijuana patients are abusing marijuana.

Hawaii is taking patients’ gun rights because the federal government believes medical marijuana patients are abusing marijuana.

Section 134-7(a) is disqualifying Hawaii patients because: “No person who is a fugitive from justice or is a person prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition under federal law shall own, possess, or control any firearm or ammunition therefor.”

As I grew up in gun-lovin’ Idaho, one of the primary reasons NRA members would give me for fighting any sort of firearms registration requirement was that we couldn’t trust the government to maintain a list they could use to take people’s guns away.

Well, what is Hawaii’s medical marijuana registry now?

The futility of gun laws

It’s almost as if the left doesn’t care whether gun control really works . . . The futility of gun laws

Abdul Razak Ali Artan injured 11 people on the campus of Ohio State University using only an automobile and a butcher knife. The Tunisian-born Mohamed Lajouaiej Bouel killed eighty-four people in Nice, France, running them down with a truck. Those who are determined to kill may use homemade bombs, knives, automobiles or toxins. There can never be fashioned an effective legal defense against murder.

President John Adams expertly articulated the root problem 250 years ago saying, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.” Democrats and their fake-news mouthpieces are today’s enemies of morality and religion. Their libelous charges, vicious slander and irrational hate are the toxic and deadly agents that foment the kind of violence that we observe and abhor.

National reciprocity is the NRA's dream (courtesy reddit.com and gunnerz)

We’ll believe it (and open the champagne) when we see it signed by the President . . .  The NRA’s Dream Bill Is Getting Remarkably Close to Reality

The possibility of a person walking through a crowded national park, or even your local playground, with a gun concealed on his hip may not be as unlikely as it once seemed. That’s because over the past few days a remarkable amount of progress has been made on a bill that would force states to recognize concealed carry permits from other states.

It’s the National Rifle Association’s dream bill. And it is closer than it has ever been to becoming law.

This week the House Judiciary Committee passed the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (PDF), which also would allow off-duty officers to carry weapons in school zones, after the NRA labeled the legislation its “highest legislative priority in Congress.”

Ohio court rules banning subjects of orders of protection may violate the Second Amendment

Ohio’s constitution specifies a right to keep and bear arms, too . . . Ohio appellate court: Ban on firearms in restraining order may violate Second Amendment

Many civil protection orders, especially in domestic violence cases, ban the target from possessing guns. Courts generally uphold these as permissible restrictions, at least when the order is based on a finding that the target had committed a violent act or had threatened violence; see, e.g., U.S. v. Bena (8th Cir. 2011). But the matter is not entirely clear, especially since such orders can often be entered on just a finding of preponderance of the evidence, following relatively truncated procedures where the defendant doesn’t have a lawyer. (This makes them different from felony convictions or even violent misdemeanor convictions, which require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and in which the defendant generally has been represented by a lawyer.)

Mission First Tactical and Stag Arms Minimalist AR15

Less is more, for eight-and-a-half bills, more or less. Mission First Tactical Partners with Stag Arms for Stag 15 Minimalist Rifle

The Stag 15 Minimalist in 5.56 NATO (.223) is built on MIL-Spec forged 7075 aluminum receiver with Type 3 hard coat anodizing, a MIL-Spec single stage trigger, a MIL-Spec manganese phosphate coated M16 BCG and a 16-inch chrome-lined, government profile barrel. MFT accessories complete the Minimalist build with the MFT Battlelink Minimalist MIL-Spec stock that has an angled non-slip rubberized buttpad for quicker presentations, even while wearing body armor. The upper section of the MFT stock has an enhanced cheek weld and a QD sling mounting point is positioned for ambidextrous use . . .

MFT’s TEKKO Polymer AR15 carbine handguard with M-LOK rail provides a secure platform for the mounting of Picatinny rails and other accessories. The single stage trigger is housed within an MFT E-VolV Enhanced Trigger Guard with an oversized opening that allows full access to the trigger, even with gloves. The MFT ENGAGE™ AR/15/M16 pistol grip has textured finger swells and a grooved backstrap for a positive grip surface even wearing gloves or in wet conditions.

The pistol grip also features a secure, water resistant storage compartment and a plug retention for one-handed storage access. The MFT flip up rear sight is a low profile, snag resistant design paired with an A2 front sight with full elevation adjustment for rapid target acquisition. Finally, the Stag 15 Minimalist Rifle comes with a 30-rd MFT Polymer Magazine engineered as an enhancement of the standard STANAG design with a stippled texture and low-profile front ribs with a flared floor plate for positive extraction and handling.

Yikes . . . Homeowner shot while peering out window in Portage (MI)

Portage police say a 69-year-old woman was shot inside her own home as she peered out her bedroom window to see who was knocking on her door.

It happened around 1:15 a.m. Thursday in the 2600 block of Woodbine Avenue near Portage Road and Austin Lake.

The Portage Department of Public Safety believes the suspects knocked on the front door, then fired several rounds into the bedroom window next to the door when the victim looked out.

Competition shooters, get “back into action” with the new features of the Performance Center Model 686 with a 4 inch threaded barrel!

Whoopi for gun rights! The View from here looks good. Not great; “I’m not interested in an AR15 to shoot deer as if the deer are in ISIS.” But good.

Canadian shooting victims what PM Trudeau to "do something" about guns (courtesy dailywire.com and AP)

Oh, Canada . . . Quebec shooting victims want Trudeau to do something about gun violence

A coalition from Quebec is calling on the Trudeau government to live up to its promises on gun control. The group includes survivors of the Montreal Polytechnique massacre in 1989, and of the more recent fatal shooting at the Quebec City Mosque. They want the government to recognize “the human costs of weak laws, including flaws related to possession permits, gun sales and the availability of assault weapons.”

Now, to be clear, the Liberals did not promise much on gun control in 2015. In fact, they pointedly promised not to reinstitute the previous Chrétien Liberal government’s long gun registry, which the Harper folks abolished.

The Trudeau Liberals made a number of low-profile, small-bore promises on guns. The most consequential of those was that they would “immediately implement the… gun marking regulations that have been repeatedly delayed by Stephen Harper.” Halfway through the Liberal mandate, it appears that a tendency to delay on that simple measure, which some experts say might even be even more effective than a gun registry, is a habit of federal governments, regardless of their political stripe.

Clint Eastwood's prop gun turned in to police in London.

From the land formerly known as Great Britain . . . Clint Eastwood film prop is handed in to police during gun amnesty

HE’S known for playing unflappable cops and cowboys with poker faces and steely glares.

But after a prop he used in a 1968 war movie was handed in nearly 50 years later during a weapons amnesty, perhaps even Clint Eastwood will raise an eyebrow in surprise.

The sub-machine gun wielded by the US star in Where Eagles Dare was taken to Bridgwater police station in Somerset by a former film worker.

Officers confirmed it is not a functioning weapon, although it could pose a risk in the wrong hands as imitation firearms have been used in robberies.

A Shotgun Shell That Cleans Your Bore?

comments

  1. avatar Hank says:

    The heller ruling was a major thorn in the side of the anti’s. National reciprocity is like a baseball bat to their spine. It’s possible to pass this. Our goal is to win the war, and yes, we can win this.

  2. avatar PROUD chicano says:

    This Is The One To win.

  3. avatar James Earl Hoffa says:

    There’s absolutely no such thing as gun rights in the state of Hawaii I don’t even call that a state it’s an island in the Pacific Ocean that’s all it is. The Constitution doesn’t quite make it down that far. 4 years they’ve denied concealed weapons permits and only to grant them to retired police officers and rich white elitist. That entire island chain is a freaking hack.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Actually, it’s been 18 years since the Aloha State issued a single concealed carry permit. Eighteen years.

    2. avatar No one of consequence says:

      Last time I visited there (about two years ago), there was a noticeable secession vibe in the air, at least on Maui. (I didn’t visit the other islands that trip.) Mostly driven by native Hawaiians, but a number of the locals (non-Hawaiian ancestry but born there) seemed keen too.

      1. avatar Defens says:

        It’s not Federal law driving lack of gun rights in Hawaii. IF they were to succeed in seceding, the state would probably turn even more leftist.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        What would be the goal of secession? Don’t tell me they want to stop tourism. I can’t imagine what they wish to change, otherwise.

        1. avatar anonymoose says:

          They’d be just another poor South Pacific island if they seceded. Enjoy having Pearl Harbor move away, or alternatively have Pearl Harbor secure the islands under martial law and revert them to a mere territory.

        2. avatar Raoul Duke says:

          Hawaii has a screwed up economy because of the Jones Act.

          Instead of receiving shipments directly from places like Australia, Japan, China, etc. the cargo has to go to the mainland first THEN go to Hawaii and on American-owned and built ships no less. What sense does that make?

          If it didn’t have that stupid act it could be the next SIngapore or Hong Kong in terms of wealth and prosperity.

          They say keeping it up is for “national security”. Well if Hawaii is so under threat then send more soldiers there. You will never hear anyone complaining about being stationed in frickin’ Hawaii!!

  4. avatar Rokurota says:

    I would take away gun rights from anyone carrying a Browning Hi Power like that.

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      I would smack him in the back of the head and explain why he’s the reason we can’t have nice things..

    2. avatar oliver says:

      Why? Not everyone carries with a round in the chamber.

      1. avatar Nate says:

        Then why carry at all? If you can’t trust yourself, or your weapon, to be carried in a state of readiness leave it at home.

        1. avatar oliver says:

          Thats silly. Who made up that rule and where is the data to support it? Seriously, by that argument having a weapon in a holster is a serious liability since a) it takes precious seconds to draw and b) it can be snatched more easily or immobilized. You should always carry drawn, round in the chamber of course, at low ready. If not, just leave it at home. Same with the jack, tire iron and spare tire in your trunk. It takes too long to get out and a maniac might be approaching in the meantime. Thus, either drive around with that gear on your front passenger seat or just leave it all at home. First aid kit? Useless, unless its strapped to your forehead, ready to go in a split seconds notice. etc etc.it is all context dependent. Work in a bodega? keep it chambered under the counter within arms reach. strolling through the park? if you really need that extra second becaise it aint chambered then someone needs to work on their situational awareness. Anyway, it all comes down personal preference in the end. If you do not have enough time to train then by all means, one in the pipe and make it a Glock. Carry on!

    3. avatar California Richard says:

      Meh…. I’ve seen idiots carrying Hi-powers more stupider than that. At least it’s quarter cocked. If I had a nickel for every time I’ve yelled at someone for disengaging their safeties and walking a hammer down on to hot chamber I would have like $.50 er something.

  5. avatar SurfGW says:

    Saying that medicinal Marijuana patients don’t rate gun rights is the same as saying people with Vicodin prescriptions should not own guns – people should not lose their rights for exercising a legal option.
    That said, anyone who requests a medicinal Marijuana card should keep this in mind before they apply.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      The difference is that marijuana is a Schedule 1 drug, meaning it has, according to federal law any way, no legitimate medicinal use. Vicodin is not a Schedule 1 drug, and does have recognized medicinal use. Until that changes, smoking dope is no different, under federal law, than shooting up meth or heroin.

  6. avatar former water walker says:

    Quit giving kudos to Whoopi. She hates you and your gun rights. She wants the gubmint in your business “I’ve got nothing to hide”…except all those drugs. Hand in your (valuable!) prop gun you dumbazz Brit. Pathetic fool…

  7. avatar David says:

    Is that 686 Miculek approved?

  8. avatar C.S. says:

    I’m pretty sure, in the Land of Silly, a banana could pose a risk in the wrong hands.

    1. avatar Scoutino says:

      This is how you defend yourself against attack with a banana:

      https://youtu.be/U90dnUbZMmM

  9. avatar Dave says:

    What happened to the Eastwood gun? Hopefully it wasn’t destroyed.

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      Well of course it’s going to be destroyed. Although Clint would probably dispatch his agent to see if any strings can be pulled to get it back into his hands (fat chance).
      That particular page on the Internet Movie Firearm Data Base will be needing an update describing the prop’s demise.
      🤠

    2. avatar blahpony says:

      At the end of the article:

      “Avon and Somerset Police’s evidential property and stores manager Richard Vise, said: ‘(The man) said it was a prop which we have since confirmed. It could be valuable.’ Mr Vise will be sending it to the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds.”

      It will survive and people can enjoy it at the museum.

  10. avatar Chadwick says:

    Not a dream bill until it gets HPA tacked on. Hell while I’m dreaming I better go for twins! Repeal the NFA all together. Do the twins have an attractive mother? Yeah that’s getting rid of 922o.

  11. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    I think it’s wonderful that people who enjoy marijuana intoxication, during their medication time can’t get a gun. I don’t want amyone who is diminished by the drugs they voluntarily take, operating a car, a train, a ship (oil tanker), or a gun.

    For those that don’t know, certain drug prescriptions come with a warning not to operate heavy equipment. Pot heads are being treated just like everyone else. Using certain medications can cause you to be banned for life from driving a car for example.

    I know there are some people in great pain because of cancer. But most people are using cancer patients as a fig leaf to get pot for a hang nail or their foot itches or they feel depressed and think smoking a joint will “help them get through the day”.

    Having been born a raised in California, I can say the pot heads were always against guns and the second amendment. In the 1970s the legalization leadership was NEVER for gun civil rights.

    These rich white people who deal legal weed are only now discovering, what black pot dealers already knew. When you make a lot of money from weed deals there are people who WANT TO TAKE YOUR MONEY, you stupid fools!!!!!!

    1. avatar Wade says:

      I am a retired Army Ranger. I grew up on a cattle ranch. I have been shooting and handloading for almost all of my life. I would be willing to bet I am hell of lot more competant with a firearm than most. My pot smoking in the evening time has nothing to do with that. No more so than when most of the rest of you have a few drinks at dinner. It is not like you become a lunatic because you are intoxicated. The problem is that unlike alcohol there is no way to tell if you are currently under the influence of marijuana or the metabolites are just in your system. Cool, though go ahead and make a lump assesment of people who smoke marijuana. Assume all of us are hippy dippy white trash. Make sure to kiss my Ranger ass on veteran’s day just like always. Stupid

      1. avatar Snatchums says:

        The concept of assuming all weed users are irresponsible burnouts is THE SAME FUCKING THING as anti-gun people labeling all gun owners as unstable mass murderers waiting to happen.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          The *right* has been feeding us that swill, with the help/enforcement of the government, BS about “gateway drug” etc. I’ve never used it, so I should just leave the question to the experts, like our last 3 presidents, except politics. We need to pass “Darwin’s Law”, repealing all drug laws and releasing all inmates serving time for selling or possessing drugs of any kind, presto, the budget is balanced and the tax cut is assured. The losers will weed themselves out without our interference.

      2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

        ..And the fact that pharmacy medication has an effect on your liver. Doesn’t matter what it is. From Tylenol to Oxicoton it’s going to hit your liver.

        Whereas, Pot is a better alternative IMO especially for chronic pain management.

        YMMV.

      3. avatar Horacemann says:

        Medicinal weed does not necessarily produce a high. If thc, the part of marijuana that gets people high, is removed there is, of course, no high. Thc is not always necessary for medicinal marijuana to do its work. Depends on the malady it is being used for. Chris from ky is an idiot who should do some research before opening his stupid pie hole.

      4. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        “I don’t wanna mess with no reefer addicts!”

      5. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        Wade
        I also retired from the US Army. But I was not special like you. But I have seen people destroy themselves, others, and property that didn’t belong to them, while they were intoxicated.

        Every pot head I every encountered drove home that day after getting high. Sometimes they didn’t make, especially when they hit another person. Or hit a power pole and inconvenienced hundreds of home owners.

        Very few pot users are responsible people. My father who smoke pot with me when I was 11 years old.
        I have no problem with people who get intoxicated at home. The problem is when they leave the house right after.
        Pot heads don’t want to be heald to the same standards as every other drug intoxication user.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      “Using certain medications can cause you to be banned for life from driving a car for example.”

      Citation?

  12. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    Victims of illegal arrests will be paid compensation? WTF? What about charging, convicting, and imprisoning the douche bag(s) that committed that particular assault and kidnapping. Why is it always the tax payers that are punished for government employees crime?

    1. avatar Snatchums says:

      If cops started being charged with kidnapping for illegal arrests, grand theft for bullshit civil asset seizures the Fraternal Order of Police would have a collective aneurysm that could be measured in kilotons of TNT.

      We can dream can’t we?

  13. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    “It’s almost as if the left doesn’t care whether gun control really works . . .”

    Exactly. Gun control laws are intended to be symbolic references to advocate culture. So long as the policy or law affirms the gun-controller’s social position and political beliefs, they’re happy. “Gun-Free-Zones” are another example of this kind of symbolism. People who advocate for gun-free-zones know full-well that the little signs are ineffectual but value their presence nonetheless because seeing them reaffirms their status. Stupid is as stupid does.

  14. avatar Michael says:

    Have no fear the republicans will screw this

  15. avatar strych9 says:

    With regard to the weed thing:

    I think they’ve opened a can of worms here that they’re going to wish they didn’t.

    Holding such a card could be used as evidence of prohibited person status but in and of itself the card doesn’t really prove anything. The government would have to go to court and go through all that “due process” stuff and secure a conviction to actually prove anything that would allow for confiscation. Is Hawaii really prepared to do that? There’s gotta be someone there who has a card that doesn’t use and if they go after that person the city/state is gonna get it’s balls sued off. Do they really want that?

    On top of that the whole thing is a murky area anyway. Say I am injured in a horrific car accident which is the result of a drunk driver hitting me and controlled substance painkillers are part of my treatment because it takes half a dozen surgeries to repair my leg or something. Nearing the end of this I tell the doc that I’m having some issues with the meds and he/she decides to wean me off them. Guess what? I’m now technically a prohibited person because I’ve admitted to a form of addiction to a controlled substance. Do I have to give up my guns? If so, for how long? Will anyone in government really prosecute that case? Doubtful.

    Even further; how long does that prohibited person status last? Does it stop when I’ve been fully weaned from the drugs? Do I have to stay sober for a period of time? Am I an addict for life as AA/NA would have us believe?

    Further still; what is a “user”? When I sit in my office chair am I a driver? Of course not. When I sit there am I a motorcycle rider? Nope. I can’t think of another area of life where a status requiring action is applied when the action isn’t occuring other than job titles. So as a technicality of English MMJ users are only users when using. They’re not lying on a 4473 unless they’re puffing a joint as they fill out the form. So, their status constantly alternates between prohibited and not prohibited.

    Like I said, I don’t think they really want to open this can of worms.

    1. avatar Snatchums says:

      There has already been a court case in California that establishes a card holder as a prohibited person, regardless if the person uses. It came out of a case of a caregiver getting a card so he didn’t have to drag his bedridden patient in every time they needed to resupply.

      1. avatar Snatchums says:

        Edit:

        Wilson v. Lynch

        Looks like I may have been confusing two cases. This one is in Nevada, not a caregiver but was a card holder that denied being a user. 9th circuit didn’t care, prohibited person for simply possessing a MMJ card.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          One of the beauties of our system is that such a case can be litigated again and can, potentially, go to the SCOTUS and be overturned.

          The 9th is the most overturned circuit in the nation and the ruling you cite is evidence of why. Such a ruling is a direct affront to the Constitution, and basic logic, in ways so numerous that I won’t even bother to list them.

  16. avatar ColdNorth says:

    On the Canadian post- this was also posted to the CBC (Canada’s government broadcaster), and comments against additional gun control far outnumbered the opposing views. So much so, that if rumor is correct, the Liberal government is stepping back a bit. They are already in trouble with several scandals, and don’t want to lose any additional support. While the younger members might be ready to add more gun control, the older ones remember how bad it hit them election-wise.

  17. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

    “F” – Hawaii, “F” – Honolulu, “‘F” – Medical Marijuana Card holders nationwide! I don’t care what they are doing to dope-smokers. Why? Because these same dopers are OUR enemy, they support the Democrats ie. those that make it easier for them to get their weed (some at taxpayer’s expense) and they typically support the same Liberal/Progressive policies that target US aiming to restrict or abolish OUR 2nd Amendment Rights.

    Let me make something abundantly clear (for some here), Medical Marijuana card holders are NOT our “friends”, some are dysfunctional addicts, the dregs of society, many are HIV/AIDS+ and we ALL know how THAT “community” of “reactionaries” and “social justice warriors” votes “en bloc” and who THEY typically cast THEIR ballots for come Election Day.

    I believe in massive retaliation for the Kate Steinle verdict, the DOJ/FBI/ATF/DEA/FDA ought to be raiding and closing EVERY marijuana shop in Liberal/Progressive states that have made sales “legal” as it’s still “illegal” under Federal law. The Democrat-controlled states, these so-called “Sanctuary States” (they sure as Hell ain’t “sanctuaries” for law-abiding gun owners), MUST be punished severely, they ignore our immigration laws and pander to dopers while at the same time routinely abusing US, restricting and seeking to effectively abolish OUR 2nd Amendment rights, it’s time they were made to “feel the pain”. Lets demand the Feds shut down that entire industry and seize the ill gotten gains including the windfall taxes Democrats are collecting on the weed sales.

  18. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    H.R. 38 really is a dream. I’d prefer the SHARE Act because it’s got so much in it. Also I don’t plan on going to any states that don’t take my license anyway, but that’s just a selfish reason for preferring the SHARE Act.

    The big upsides of H.R. 38 for me is that I wouldn’t have to memorize more than two sets of laws regarding where and what I could carry. Technically, I’d only have to memorize one, but knowing my state’s law seems like a good idea anyway.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email