420 friendly turkey hunting partner

[Knocker of rocks]

Your analysis is flawed. A simple user of prescription meds is not necessarily addicted or unlawful. Thus, a blanket statement that a user of such meds is an addict, and as a co sequence, is a prohibited person is wrong.  However, a simple MJ user is is an unlawful user and is a prohibited person, according to federal law, regardless of being an addict. And a med MJ card holder is also prohibited according to BATFE.

Edited to add that prescription meds and their abuses or addiction is OT to the OP. I'll agree that such addicts and abusers or unlawful users of prescription meds should have scrutiny, but that is a separate topic. Simple MJ use including med MJ use (as opposed to addiction) is specifically called out in GCA68 and BATFE interpretations, and because of that, people should be aware.

1) Have you ever seen a user of anti-depressants or mood medication quit?  Even if they want to, they often fail because of the level of their addiction to these prescribed medicines.

2) How about those that drink too much?  Alcohol is a depressant.  Thereby alcoholics are addicted to drugs and are ineligible to posses firearms.  Furthermore, as AA and others so often say, once an addict - always an addict.  Thereby, even those who have successfully gone thru treatment and have been clean and sober for years should face the same legal jeopardy as the occasional pot smoker.

I maintain that the government is only very selectively enforcing this law. 

And actually almost this entire thread is OT to the OP

[bobcat]

Fl0und3rz,  I interpret it differently than you.

It says "an unlawful user of marijuana."

Well, if you're using it in Washington, and you're over 21, you are NOT an unlawful user.

According to federal law, marijuana is not legal and therein lies the issue.

I realize that is the issue, but if a person is in possessioin of marijuana in their home, or camp, or other private place, they won't be charged with a crime. Not by the state, and not by the feds. So is it really unlawful?

[slayerofthesea]

I think that smoking weed is better then drinking and what if he is just looking for a guy who dosent care if he does while they are hunting. I have a friend who is like that. I partake some times not alot i could pass a ua. but remember saftey first, then team work  :-)

[bigtex]

Fl0und3rz,  I interpret it differently than you.

It says "an unlawful user of marijuana."

Well, if you're using it in Washington, and you're over 21, you are NOT an unlawful user.

According to federal law, marijuana is not legal and therein lies the issue.

I realize that is the issue, but if a person is in possessioin of marijuana in their home, or camp, or other private place, they won't be charged with a crime. Not by the state, and not by the feds. So is it really unlawful?

Unless camp is on federal lands 

[Practical Approach]

Really, this is actually a thread. It is a sad day for this website when people are advertising for a nother drug using hunter.  Is this a craigslist dating site?   Really, hey anyone out there up for elk hunting and booze drinking.  What are people thinking.  Do what you want, but make sure you do it while the guns are put up and please don't make a public specticle of yourself on the website.   

[Fl0und3rz]

Fl0und3rz,  I interpret it differently than you.

It says "an unlawful user of marijuana."

Well, if you're using it in Washington, and you're over 21, you are NOT an unlawful user.

And if you are simultaneously in the US, you are an unlawful user, according to federal law.  Unfortunately for you, the feds interpretation governs.

[bobcat]

Fl0und3rz,  I interpret it differently than you.

It says "an unlawful user of marijuana."

Well, if you're using it in Washington, and you're over 21, you are NOT an unlawful user.

And if you are simultaneously in the US, you are an unlawful user, according to federal law.  Unfortunately for you, the feds interpretation governs.

Maybe that's true, however, I'm not sure why it's unfortunate for me.   

[xd2005]

Just as a side note, thef act that people cannot agree on what the law actually is is a problem. Not necessarily with us, but with the state of current laws. In order to break a law, one should be able to A.) know the law exists and B.) know when they have broken it. In today's society, more and more laws make meeting both standards difficult.

Ok, sorry, rant over.

[slayerofthesea]

So what you guys are telling me is that if someone has a Smoke Card and your on national forest land taking a puff and the federal dudes show up can get cited for possession ? But  any local warden or police officer can not

Correct

it would be dropped in a heart beat in court if it was in Wa state.

[Fl0und3rz]

1) Have you ever seen a user of anti-depressants or mood medication quit?  Even if they want to, they often fail because of the level of their addiction to these prescribed medicines.

Yes.

2) How about those that drink too much?  Alcohol is a depressant.  Thereby alcoholics are addicted to drugs and are ineligible to posses firearms.  Furthermore, as AA and others so often say, once an addict - always an addict.  Thereby, even those who have successfully gone thru treatment and have been clean and sober for years should face the same legal jeopardy as the occasional pot smoker.

Also yes.  Fortunately or unfortunately, AA's interpretation of federal law bears no weight in the matter.

I maintain that the government is only very selectively enforcing this law. 

And actually almost this entire thread is OT to the OP

Regardless, it is the government's interpretation and enforcement that matters, not your own, unfortunate as that may be or how we might both agree it would be better.

Maybe that's true, however, I'm not sure why it's unfortunate for me.   

Granted, "unfortunate" may have been a poor choice of words, unless you choose to avail yourself of that interpretation and risk the consequences, unwittingly.

[JoeE]

So what you guys are telling me is that if someone has a Smoke Card and your on national forest land taking a puff and the federal dudes show up can get cited for possession ? But  any local warden or police officer can not

Correct

it would be dropped in a heart beat in court if it was in Wa state.

Unless it was cited into Federal Court, then it doesn't matter what state you're in.

[Hawgdawg]

Fl0und3rz,  I interpret it differently than you.

It says "an unlawful user of marijuana."

Well, if you're using it in Washington, and you're over 21, you are NOT an unlawful user.

According to federal law, marijuana is not legal and therein lies the issue.

But you don't understand mr Moose and Goose...I have a state stamp!!

[slayerofthesea]

i dont have to worry about it. i dont smoke it very often so i am good and when i do its late at night so i guess it really dosent affect me at all

[Bob33]

Consider this: section 11 of ATF form 4473 asks twelve questions related to eligibility to purchase a firearm. Lying on the form is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. ATF form 4473 specifically asks about marijuana use in section 11.e.:

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic, or any controlled substance?

If state law allows a person to use marijuana for medical reasons or recreational reasons, but federal law doesn’t, does that make the marijuana use “unlawful”?

According to a September 21, 2011 opinion letter from the ATF, the answer is “yes” –medical marijuana users are unlawful users according to federal law regardless of what state law says.

[slayerofthesea]

Consider this: section 11 of ATF form 4473 asks twelve questions related to eligibility to purchase a firearm. Lying on the form is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. ATF form 4473 specifically asks about marijuana use in section 11.e.:

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic, or any controlled substance?

If state law allows a person to use marijuana for medical reasons or recreational reasons, but federal law doesnt, does that make the marijuana use unlawful?

According to a September 21, 2011 opinion letter from the ATF, the answer is yes medical marijuana users are unlawful users according to federal law regardless of what state law says.

but the feds also say the states have the right to make there own laws. everyone voted on the law they passed it we can smoke it in wa the feds wont do anything about us smoking  it. if you kep up on current new on it the feds said they will let wa state keep the law. so it is legal in wa now.