Court: Pot cardholder can carry gun ...

[spin]

Sheriff tried to deny permit to local medical pot patient
June 17, 2010

The Oregon Court of Appeals agreed with a lower court Wednesday that Sheriff Mike Winters' denial of a concealed handgun license to a medical marijuana cardholder wasn't supported by law.

Upholding an earlier decision by Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Mark Schiveley, the ruling said Winters did not have grounds to deny Cynthia Willis' permit in 2008. Winters had argued that the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 was the legal basis of his decision.

In its ruling, the Court of Appeals found that Willis complied with state law in her application, and disputed Winters' federal arguments. "In sum, we are not persuaded that the Sheriff is being forced to violate — or even potentially violate — any federal law by issuing a concealed handgun license pursuant to Oregon's concealed handgun licensing statutes," the court ruled.

Portland attorney Leland Berger, who represents Willis and three others in the state who also have been denied concealed handgun permits, said the decision is a victory for marijuana cardholders throughout the state.

"It means the sheriffs in Oregon will no longer be able to discriminate against patients," Berger said. "It's time for the sheriff (Winters) to stop wasting the taxpayer's money and stop litigating this issue."

He said the handgun permit denial by Winters and other sheriffs is a result of their opposition to the medical marijuana law, rather than over any real issue with the weapons permit.

Winters said he hadn't reviewed the court ruling yet and would need to review it with his attorney before he could make any comments.

Benjamin Bloom, Winters' attorney, said he couldn't comment on the case or whether the decision would be appealed until after he discussed it with Winters.

***snip***

"In sum, the circuit court correctly concluded that Oregon's concealed handgun licensing statutes are not preempted by the federal Gun Control Act," the court determined.

The court noted that Oregon's law gives someone a license for an action — carrying a concealed weapon — that would otherwise be illegal.

Likewise, the medical marijuana act allows someone to do something that would otherwise be illegal in Oregon, the court said.
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100617/NEWS/6170328/-1/NEWSMAP

[provis99]

1. Let me get this straight,

The NRA is defending the rights of terrorist suspects to have guns, but some local sheriff won't let a pot user have a gun? Morality of the right-wing sure is a funny thing, isn't it?

[virginia mountainman]

2. Thats a hell of a whopper you just told...

Where does the NRA support terrorist suspects to have guns???

Please back wild statements up with SOMETHING..

[one-eyed fat man]

5. Did you miss the memo?

The Bush era secret terrorist "No-Fly List" is a blatant run around the Constitution in that people get put on it in secret, no one can tell them how to get off the list, and is a despicable vestige of a power-hungry tyrannical bunch of thugs eager to deprive innocents of their rights in the name of public safety............UNLESS it is used to target potential gun-owners, whereopun it is INSTANTLY transformed into the most correct government action possible as no "true progressive" can support anything but a "GUNZ FREE" Utopia!:sarcasm:

or, its OK to target people that certain groups have given themselves permission to hate.

[provis99]

7. haven't been paying attention for the past month, have you.

The NRA is pushing for people on the government terrorism watch list to be allowed guns.

http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/opinionzone/2010/05/11/nra-allow-terrorism-watch-list-suspects-to-buy-firearms/

[slackmaster]

8. How would you feel about not allowing people who are on that list to vote?

There is no recourse for people who find their names on the list in error.

What other rights would you deny them? After all, not allowing a person to vote isn't life-threatening. It's just an inconvenience, right? If their name gets cleared, they can always vote later. Might as well deny them the right to jury trials too.

How do you know that people who are on that list are actually suspected of terrorism?

How would you feel if it happened to you, or to someone you know?

[PavePusher]

11. And quite correctly, too.

"Due Process" and all that other silly Constitutional stuff, dontchyaknow.

[spin]

15. Since Ted Kennedy was on the list ...

should he have been banned gun ownership?

Ted Kennedy's Airport Adventure

CAPITOL HILL, Aug. 19, 2004



(CBS/AP) The Senate Judiciary Committee heard Thursday morning from one of its own about some of the problems with airline "watch" lists.

Massachusetts Democrat Ted Kennedy says he had a close encounter with the lists when trying to take the US Airways shuttle out of Washington to Boston.

The ticket agent wouldn't let him on the plane. His name was on the list in error. With help from an airport supervisor, Kennedy was able to fly home, but then the same thing happened coming back to Washington. Some phone calls straightened things out.

Kennedy says he had to enlist the help of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to get his name stricken from the list. The process took several weeks, in all.

And Kennedy asks what about the little guy? emphasis added
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/06/terror/main610466.shtml

Well here's a recent story about a "little guy".

Meet Mikey, 8: U.S. Has Him on Watch List

By LIZETTE ALVAREZ
Published: January 13, 2010

The Transportation Security Administration, under scrutiny after last month’s bombing attempt, has on its Web site a “mythbuster” that tries to reassure the public.

Myth: The No-Fly list includes an 8-year-old boy.

Buster: No 8-year-old is on a T.S.A. watch list.

“Meet Mikey Hicks,” said Najlah Feanny Hicks, introducing her 8-year-old son, a New Jersey Cub Scout and frequent traveler who has seldom boarded a plane without a hassle because he shares the name of a suspicious person. “It’s not a myth.”

Michael Winston Hicks’s mother initially sensed trouble when he was a baby and she could not get a seat for him on their flight to Florida at an airport kiosk; airline officials explained that his name “was on the list,” she recalled.

The first time he was patted down, at Newark Liberty International Airport, Mikey was 2. He cried.

After years of long delays and waits for supervisors at every airport ticket counter, this year’s vacation to the Bahamas badly shook up the family. Mikey was frisked on the way there, then more aggressively on the way home.

“Up your arms, down your arms, up your crotch — someone is patting your 8-year-old down like he’s a criminal,” Mrs. Hicks recounted. “A terrorist can blow his underwear up and they don’t catch him. But my 8-year-old can’t walk through security without being frisked.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/nyregion/14watchlist.html

[hack89]

16. Can you explain what due process gets people on that list?

Don't you think that there should be a higher bar for denying civil rights than a nameless bureaucrat putting a name on a list without any public hearing or process?

[rrneck]

17. How does one

find themselves on that list? And how would you get your name removed if it wrongfully appears?

[slackmaster]

18. The FBI provides answers to your questions and much, much more

http://www.fbi.gov/terrorinfo/counterrorism/faqs.htm

...Can I find out if I am in the TSDB?

The TSC cannot reveal whether a particular person is in the TSDB. The TSDB remains an effective tool in the government’s counterterrorism efforts because its contents are not disclosed. If TSC revealed who was in the TSDB, terrorist organizations would be able to circumvent the purpose of the terrorist watchlist by determining in advance which of their members are likely to be questioned or detained....

<snip>

...Are individuals removed from the TSDB?

Yes. The TSC works with partner agencies through a formal process to remove individuals who no longer meet the HSPD-6 terrorism criteria.

How does TSC ensure that the TSDB is accurate?

The TSC has a staff dedicated to redress and quality assurance that conducts comprehensive as well as case-specific reviews of TSDB records to ensure they are current, accurate, and thorough. TSC conducts research and coordinates with other federal agencies to ensure the terrorist record is as complete, accurate, and thorough as possible. TSC’s redress and quality assurance process has resulted in the correction or removal of hundreds of records in TSDB.

What are TSC's redress procedures?

See the Redress Procedures for details.... :crazy:

<snip>

...I am having trouble when I try to fly or cross the border into the United States. Does this mean I am in the TSDB?

No. At security checkpoints like our nation’s borders, there are many law enforcement or security reasons that an individual may be singled out for additional screening. Most agencies have redress offices (e.g., Ombudsman) where individuals who are experiencing repeated problems can seek help. If an individual is experiencing these kinds of difficulties, he/she should cooperate with the agency screeners and explain the recurring problems. The screeners can supply instructions on how to raise concerns to the appropriate agency redress office....

Clearly there is nothing resembling due process here.

[benEzra]

21. Ummm, being on the Bush/Cheney secret blacklist doesn't make you a "terrorist".

Senator Edward Kennedy found himself on that list at one point, and it took a good bit of effort to get off. Was he a "terrorist" too?

It's really annoying how the Bush Administration's assault on civil rights in the name of "terrah" suddenly becomes perfectly OK if it's done in the name of "terrah + gunz".

:crazy:

[one-eyed fat man]

32. speaking of annoying

It's annoying that a secret blacklist from the LAST administration, that was so roundly condemned by the candidates during the campaign has been so fully embraced by THIS administration!

GITMO closed in a year.

Troops out of Iraq in 16 months.

The only "change" I see is the difference in promises then and actions now!

[jody]

26. provis99 you use fiction and fantasy to attack pro-RKBA Democrats armed with nuclear facts.

I should feel sorry for you but . . . . . . .

[SteveM]

33. So, 2A is not denied because the Terror Watch List is "bureaucratic," not mean-spirited.

Nice dodge by the editorialists.

Why is it that the 5th Amendment serves as a constitutional escape hatch when someone wants to get at somebody? Wasn't Sen. Lautenburg trying to get at somebody by proposing anyone on the TWL be ipso facto denied the right to purchase a firearm? Please note: the NICS test denies a firearm purchase if someone is CONVICTED of a crime which would deny possession of a firearm, or said person has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. In both instances, DUE PROCESS is required.

Liberals and Conservatives regularly have poo-poo fights over the 5th.

[slackmaster]

9. The sheriff's attempt at denying the person a permit was not a "right wing" act

It was an authoritarian act.

[GreenStormCloud]

14. Defending civil rights is RW?

Did I wake up in an alternate universe? Are we suddenly in DC Comics Bizzaro world?

[Euromutt]

19. You know what the difference is between a "criminal suspect" and a "terrorist suspect"?

The "criminal suspect" is suspected of having committed an offense that has actually occurred. A "terrorist suspect" is suspected of being affiliated in some way, however tangential, with some organization that might, at some unspecified future date, commit some unspecified act that someone in the executive branch of the United States' government might regard as an act of terrorism.

The continued existence of the "terrorist watch list" and the "No Fly list" is a fucking disgrace, and I for one am severely disappointed in the Obama administration that it didn't get rid of these abominations in its first month. I am also severely dismayed at the various self-described Democrats who would have roundly condemned (and possibly did) the "watch lists" while Bush was still in office being just fine with them now.

[east texas lib]

31. Not as funny as your version of reality...

Not even close.

[Oregone]

3. Winters is a dick

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

4. Are you allowed to be high while carrying?

[spin]

6. You can have a concealed carry permit and drink alcohol ...

but it's a bad idea to "pack heat" and be drunk. The authorities frown on such activity.

I would imagine that the same would apply to being high.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

10. Umm, as far I understand, in most places it is ILLEGAL to be drunk and carrying.

Drinking and being drunk are two different things. If you drink you may not get drunk.
It's generally understood that if you smoke you will likely get high.

[Doc_Technical]

12. I ain't drunk, I'm just drinkin'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjVfc8-Y7sQ&feature=related

[jazzhound]

22. Any friend of Albert Collins is a friend of mine!!!

Unless of course you have contempt for gun rights and gun owners. :) :) :)

[spin]

13. Good point ...

It's interesting that the use of medical marijuana in California will not result in a loss of a driver's license in California, but it's a crime to drive under the influence.

Medical marijuana use no longer means automatic license suspension

The use of medical marijuana can no longer be the sole grounds for losing driving privileges.

In a policy revision -- or clarification, depending upon who you speak with -- the state Department of Motor Vehicles has determined, in writing, that the use of medical marijuana prescribed by a physician is to be treated the same as any other prescription medication that may affect safe driving.

The update came about after the medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed suit on behalf of a 53-year-old Atwater woman who lost her driver's license due to her use of medical marijuana.

”Despite Ms. Johnson's clean driving record, not having caused an accident in 37 years of driving, the DMV revoked her license on July 26, 2008,” according to the Americans for Safe Access' announcement.

The specific DMV language, according to the ASA, cited Johnson's addiction to or habitual use of a drug preventing her from safely operating a vehicle.

Prior to the case going to trial, the DMV added the change to its Driver Safety Procedure Manual and reinstated Johnson's driving privileges, according to the ASA.

”The new DMV policy is a significant departure from how the agency approached medical marijuana in the past,” ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford said. “Drivers no longer have their licenses suspended or revoked simply because of their status as medical marijuana patients.”

***snip***

Hermes said Wednesday in a teleconference that the issue has nothing to do with driving under the influence -- both Johnson and an earlier patient whose license was suspended did not drive while using medical marijuana or under its influence.

”It's still a crime to drive under the influence of marijuana,” ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford said. Elford represented Johnson in the group's lawsuit.

Instead, the issue was the DMV's policy to revoke or suspend the licenses of medical marijuana patients solely on the basis of being medical marijuana patients. emphasis added
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_11841741

[Euromutt]

20. Depends on the state

In Washington state, being legally "under the influence" of alcohol or drugs while in possession of a firearm outside your home or place of business can result in forfeiture of the firearm, and possibly your CCW permit. There's no problem with getting sloshed at home, though.

And I'd say the rules for medical marijuana should be like those for any prescription drug that "may affect your ability to operate motor vehicles or heavy machinery." If you're on serious painkillers after being injured or undergoing an operation, you shouldn't pop a couple and then get behind the wheel; similarly, you probably shouldn't get behind the wheel after consuming your medical marijuana either.

Strikes me that the sheriff in this instance was prone to the fallacious premise that opponents of the decriminalizing drugs often are, which is that if you let people smoke marijuana, they'll be high every waking hour. Just like legalizing alcohol caused those who consume it to be drunk every waking hour, right?

[TheWraith]

30. In most states, it's illegal to carry while under the influence.

The definition of being "under the influence" is typically the same as it is for driving a car, which includes use of pot or other drugs.

[Travis Coates]

23. I was gonna rec this thread but then I got high

I was gonna hit that button hard but then I got high

Now this thread's at zero and I know why

Because I got high Because I got high Because I got high

[jazzhound]

24. I was gonna rec this thread but then I got drunk

I fumbled for the mouse as the rec count sunk.

(at least I had a shot since I didn't do junk)

Because I got drunk........because I got drunk........because I got drunk..............

[jazzhound]

25. I was gonna rec this thread but then I got layed

As she ran with my wallet I found i'd been played

The preachers Sunday sermon, I should have obeyed

Because I got layed.........because I got layed..........because I got layed...........

[Travis Coates]

27. For those who're wondering what we'rew on about

Enjoy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeYsTmIzjkw

[jazzhound]

28. Actually, I was just riffin on your post! n/t

[David West]

29. Dang, thats my county!

Craziness. I guess I'll be telling everyone I know not to re-elect Mr. Winters.