Win Win for Government sales of Marijuana and gun$.
Win Win for Gun Ownership Cannabis Consumer$.
A federal appeals court panel upheld a lower court’s ruling on Wednesday, declaring that federal charges against a non-violent, cannabis-using gun owner were unconstitutional.
“The short of it is that our history and tradition may support some limits on a presently intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon,” the court wrote in the new opinion, “but they do not support disarming a sober person based solely on past substance usage.”
Judges have also contested assertions made by Department of Justice attorneys that individuals who use cannabis pose a greater danger than their fellow Americans.
“Nor, contrary to what the government contends, do restrictions on the mentally ill or more generalized traditions of disarming ‘dangerous’ persons apply to nonviolent, occasional drug users when of sound mind.”
The DOJ has contended in this and other recent legal proceedings that the federal prohibition on gun and ammunition possession by individuals who use marijuana aligns with historical limitations on gun ownership, including those applied to individuals deemed mentally defective and others whose firearm possession poses a risk to public safety.
The Fifth Circuit panel disagreed.
“We must ask: why was severe mental illness a reason the Founders disarmed people, and is that ‘why’ ‘relevantly similar’ to § 922(g)(3)?”
Referring to the legal provisions that prohibit individuals who engage in the use of illegal drugs from owning firearms.
Judges also said the government failed to demonstrate that lawful restrictions on gun ownership by domestic abusers or the mentally ill were sufficiently similar to its law against firearm possession by drug users.
“Marijuana user or not,” opined the court, “Paola is a member of our political community and thus has a presumptive right to bear arms. By infringing on that right, § 922(g)(3) contradicts the Second Amendment’s plain text.”
Read the full Fifth Circuit opinion
Cases
The case, U.S. v. Connelly, is one of a handful of federal court cases.
Paola Connelly is a non-violent, marijuana smoking gunowner. El Paso police came to her house in response to a “shots fired” call. When they arrived, they saw John, Paola’s husband, standing at their neighbor’s door firing a shotgun. After arresting him, they spoke with Paola, who indicated that she would at times smoke marijuana as a sleep aid and for anxiety. A sweep revealed that the Connellys’ home contained drug paraphernalia and several firearms, including firearms owned by Paola. There was no indication that Paola was intoxicated at the time.
Read the rest here
Other Cases
As always… Follow the money. If you can.
More Posts
Use of a computer to commit a crime – The latest add on charge
FRAUDULENT ACCESS TO COMPUTERS, COMPUTER SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER NETWORKS (EXCERPT)Act 53 of...
Cannabis – The Rise – The Downfall – The Survivors – Lawyer Up
Thieves executed a bold heist, making off with an impressive $600K in cannabis from a corporate...
Cannabis stroke risk, Michigan doctor calls for research
Individuals who consume daily are faced with a 25% increased likelihood of experiencing a heart...
Skymint is auctioning off equipment and other cannabis news
The evolution and purge continue. The strong will survive, the mismanaged and weak will be...
MRTMA defense denied dismissal by MI Court of Appeals
The Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act. Does it protect you in all Marijuana...
Use of a computer to commit a crime – The latest add on charges for your record
750.145d Use of internet or computer system; prohibited conduct; violation; penalty; jurisdiction;...
The search was triggered by the sweet smell of marijuana
The case People of Michigan v. Freddie Wilkins III (No. 367209) revolves around a legal challenge...
The End of Medical Marijuana Caregivers?
Is it the end of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Caregiver System?As the medical marijuana market...
Cannabis workers claimed employer violated labor laws
Fair Labor Standards Act still enforceable in a federally illegal business?Close to 1.2...