Denial of CC permit due to OMMP registration

[Thrustjunkie]

Hello, new to siite. Wonderful resource. My wife and I have just completed our firearms training and recieved our cert. We are now at the point to apply to the County. Neither of us has ANY criminal history at all. The thing is my wife is an OMMP card holder (medical cannabis for migraines), and I hold a grower card(so this wouldn't apply to me I'd think). We have been informed by another OMMP memeber that she was denied her permit, her reason is that she was denied under the 1968 Gun control act, which has a provision for federally controlled substance users. Has anyone had any experiance with this. It seems the feds shouldn't be invollved, as OSP is doing the background check, and they have to comply with state law.Just confused by the "INS" application,they don't even exisit anymore. THANKS FOR ANY HELP!:thank_you2:
Thrustjunkie

 

[Itstjs]

I would go before the Gun Board and plead your case. It is possible to set up a hearing, but it may be difficult, make sure you go in there with your "Guns Loaded" with general knowledge of all state and federal laws within your area and your OMMP permits. They may reverse their decisions and allow you to obtain your permits.
Good luck.

 

[kn1080]

I respectfully agree with the county. I feel that mixing drugs and firearms is generally a very dangerous idea. Welcome to the site!leasantry:

 

[Marissa]

I have to say that there is no reason to mix "substances" that alter a person with firearms. I would not be ok with a person smoking pot and carrying. Same as it is not ok to drink and carry.

I side with the county on this one as well.

 

[Glock Fan]

I'm gonna put this out there for consideration. Not that I'm agreeing one way or another as that's up to the state to make the final decision in accordance with local laws.

Let's say that a person is on prescription pain killers, ADD meds, or some other type of prescription drug that would make the average person do things that they normally wouldn't do. Should this person be denied based on the fact that they are under the care of a licensed physician and are taking prescription medications as directed by the physician?

Just some food for thought.



gf

 

[kn1080]

I'm gonna put this out there for consideration. Not that I'm agreeing one way or another as that's up to the state to make the final decision in accordance with local laws.

Let's say that a person is on prescription pain killers, ADD meds, or some other type of prescription drug that would make the average person do things that they normally wouldn't do. Should this person be denied based on the fact that they are under the care of a licensed physician and are taking prescription medications as directed by the physician?

Just some food for thought.



gf

Hmmm... very interesting point.

 

[Thrustjunkie]

I completey agree with all. But the question ISN'T can you be under the influenece and shoot. Medical Cannabis is to be used like any prescribed medication, with its attendent precautions. The question is can someones 2nd ammendment rights be violated by COMPLYING with the law? Thank you by those with a grasp of the written english word and giving an appropriate response to my question.

Thrustjunkie
Oh and some more food for thought. I have heard that certain states(Oregon has wording against it) are taking away peoples guns, if a mental health professional(this could come from MANY different angles, says they are unstable or mentallly unfit. Even tempoararly. I have heard outrage over this possible situation. And I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, but it seems alot of the negative acts done with guns in the last 40 years have been done by CRAZYS, not stoners, So I'd say take ANYONE on a antidepressant or any other PSYHC! DRUG(zombie maker) also. Plus the thing mot missed is. My wife(who HASN'T BEEN denied yet, I just figure its another governement scam to collect revune and not provide a service, as usual) ISN'T UNDER THE INFLUENCE 24/7......think asprin. Oh and I will take the side effects over what they had her on, it caused permanent BRAIN DAMAGE! and her Dr. had her at 2.5X the recommended max. So I think we will be taking resonsability of her needs from now on. Less incompetent than the Medical Community.leasantry:

 

[PaxMentis]

As I just mentioned in another thread in another section...at this point it depends greatly on the county (since the sheriff is the "decider" regarding a CCP in Oregon).

The problems are mostly up in the People's Republic in the NW corner of the state.

 

[AvidshooterTX]

This is the problem with government trying to stop crimes and/or accidents and/or bad decisions before they happen or are even likely to happen. What we should do is go with the original intent of the founding fathers, which is to respect everyone's liberty but then hold them accountable if they screw up. Problem is we do neither these days. The nanny state is trying to be our parents. We are adults, not children and we should be able to make our own decisions and then live (or die) with the consequences. I'm assuming that there are times when you are in great pain and would need your drug and during those times you would refrain from carrying, just as others refrain when they are drinking socially or whatever. Those decisions should be yours alone.

 

[willigun]

just curious; did the carry permits come through or were they denied? after all almost a year has passed.


Willy

 

[tommy62]

I respectfully agree with the county. I feel that mixing drugs and firearms is generally a very dangerous idea. Welcome to the site!leasantry:

Me too

 

[BC1]

I'm gonna put this out there for consideration. Not that I'm agreeing one way or another as that's up to the state to make the final decision in accordance with local laws.

Let's say that a person is on prescription pain killers, ADD meds, or some other type of prescription drug that would make the average person do things that they normally wouldn't do. Should this person be denied based on the fact that they are under the care of a licensed physician and are taking prescription medications as directed by the physician?

Just some food for thought.



gf

Yes, I believe that any person taking a medication that alters a state of consciousness or imapirs the ability to drive or operate machinary should not carry a gun. I would not object to gun ownership but carrying should be prohibited. A person who causes a death or serious injury in a car accident while driving under the influence of a prescription drug can still be charged with DUI.

 

[Abacab]

Yes, I believe that any person taking a medication that alters a state of consciousness or imapirs the ability to drive or operate machinary should not carry a gun. I would not object to gun ownership but carrying should be prohibited. A person who causes a death or serious injury in a car accident while driving under the influence of a prescription drug can still be charged with DUI.

Why? The state permits people to grow and use marijuana with their licensing regime. How can you deny them one thing they are statutorily allowed based on another that is permitted? It's hypocritical to issue people carry permits despite widespread consumption of alcohol (a mind altering intoxicant) simply because the feds have decided marijuana is more evil. The state should just pass a law that forbids intoxication while carrying a firearm. The law here in Maryland allows for consumption of alcohol while carrying, just not intoxication. If you are too intoxicated to carry, you are too intoxicated to drive and vice versa.

 

[PaxMentis]

It would be interesting to hear an update on this...especially since the state courts recently determined that having an OMMP card is not justification for denying a CHL...

It (still) surprises me how many on this forum dedicated to 2nd Amendment rights are so quickly willing to deny those rights to others...

 

[Xader]

The important thing to remember is that just like with alcohol, pain killers, etc.; just because they are licensed to use marijuana does not mean they will be high all the time.

By this logic, anyone over 21 should be denied a CHL because they can legally drink alcohol.

I don't believe anyone should carry while under the influence of any mind-altering substance, but that doesn't mean a person should be denied the right to defend themselves the rest of the time.

To say so is stupid at best, and likely hypocritical as well.

It (still) surprises me how many on this forum dedicated to 2nd Amendment rights are so quickly willing to deny those rights to others...

I couldn't agree more.