Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Says No to Guns for Medical Marijuana Users


The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that federal laws that prohibit drug users from purchasing firearms still apply to medical marijuana users, even in states where marijuana use has been decriminalized for medical or recreational use.

The majority of states have decriminalized marijuana use to some degree. However, at the federal level, the drug is still regulated as a schedule one narcotic, the same as heroin. Because of this, the court upheld the lower court’s ruling that allowed a gun dealer to deny a gun sale to a person with a medical marijuana card.

According to the ATF’s Form 4473 — the background check form — a person who is an unlawful user of marijuana or marijuana addict is not legally allowed to purchase guns from an FFL.

In 2011 an Arizona gun store declined to sell a woman a firearm, even though she had not disclosed her planned marijuana use. The store owner had outside knowledge that the woman, Rowan Wilson, had obtained a medical marijuana card and refused to sell her a gun.

This latest ruling maintains that federal law, not state law, should be followed when buying and selling guns. Marijuana users are not fully stripped of their Second Amendment rights under this ruling, however.

The ruling says that gun dealers aren’t allowed to transfer guns or ammunition to illegal — under federal law — marijuana users. But these people may continue to own guns and maintain their right to self-defense. The court decided that the infringement was not “severe” enough to breach the plaintiff’s constitutional rights.

“Wilson could have amassed legal firearms before acquiring a registry card,” reads the ruling (.pdf). The ATF would “not impede her right to keep her firearms or to use them to protect herself and her home.

“In addition, Wilson could acquire firearms and exercise her right to self-defense at any time by surrendering her registry card, thereby demonstrating to a firearms dealer that there is no reasonable cause to believe she is an unlawful drug user.”

Basically, the court is saying that Wilson could pre-buy guns and ammo, and because of that she maintains her Second Amendment rights. As long as she continues to have and keep her medical marijuana exemption, she cannot buy guns or ammunition.

While federal law may inhibit Wilson’s gun rights, they also prevent federal agencies from prosecuting medical marijuana users. Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 the Department of Justice is barred from using congressional funds to prosecute cases against individuals in states where marijuana has been decriminalized.

The court maintains that there is a strong link between drug users and violence — the very core of the ban. The law is there to prevent illegal drug users from owning guns. At the same time, the court is seemingly pointing to a new course of action against the federal law.

See Also: Drug Overdoses Cause More Deaths than Guns

“The Government argues that [there is] … a strong link between drug use and violence,” argues the court. “Studies and surveys … suggest a significant link between drug use, including marijuana use and violence. While it would have been helpful for the government to provide the studies in this case, Wilson has not challenged their methodology. We therefore have no occasion to evaluate the reliability of the studies and instead accept them.”

“By citing to the link between unlawful drug users and violence in this case, however, the government incorrectly conflates registry cardholders with unlawful drug users,” it continues. “The government’s showings of the links between drug use and violence would be sufficient were we applying intermediate scrutiny.”

The court continues to explain that it’s not what Wilson is challenging but how. “Wilson flatly maintains that she is not an unlawful drug user and is instead challenging a set of laws that bar non-drug users from purchasing firearms.”

No matter how many states, districts and territories decriminalize and regulate marijuana, the federal position on pot and guns remains unchanged. For now, the court maintains that these laws do not completely bar people from exercising their Second Amendment rights — they just can’t buy guns or ammo as long as they use marijuana.

Wilson may attempt to take this to the Supreme Court, although the court has a recent history of upholding statutes and federal law. Realistically, if marijuana users want to buy guns — and gun owners, vice versa — marijuana laws need to change from the top down.

About the author: Max Slowik is a writer with over a dozen years of experience and is a lifelong shooter. He has unwavering support for the Second Amendment and the human right to self-defense. His ambition is to follow Thomas Paine, as a journalist by profession and a propagandist by inclination.

{ 56 comments… add one }
  • Jim January 7, 2017, 3:54 pm

    Posters note: when you argue that “alcohol is much worse” you’re doing nothing but giving ammo to the restrictors. What’s your point, “My addiction is better than yours”? The 9th is an anti 2nd court, pro drug use, pro dependency, anti individual freedom court. Can you say “California”? Even the 9th didn’t have nerve enough to say gun ownership was illegal, but they certainly are leaning that direction, and had the Presidential election gone the other way, California legislators would have mounted another new assault on ownership for anyone who “uses alcohol, uses pain relief medications, or mood altering drugs like Cialis or Viagra!!”

  • Rex Jarman September 10, 2016, 12:14 pm

    More people killed from alcohol, then from marijuana. So why are all the alcoholic cops, allowed to carry guns?

  • borg September 8, 2016, 12:05 am

    What percentage of people that have a medical pot card are disabled? This is a backdoor ban on gun buying for people with disabling conditions and is therefore backdoor discrimination of disabled and therefores multiple federal laws and constitutional provisions in order to preserve one arbritray law.

  • borg September 8, 2016, 12:00 am

    If a federal law made it illegal for pot card holders to buy a bible would this court rule that the law does not destroy the freedom of religion since she can still use her tattered bible.

  • borg September 7, 2016, 11:57 pm

    The fact that the 4473 form asks are you an unlawful user a drugs rather than are you a user of drugs would be enough of a legal hair that the supreme could declare that due to both states rights and the legality of her use of the drug in her state imply that she is a legal user and as a legal user she is entitled to buy firearms since being unable to destroys her 2nd amendment right in the same way being disallowed from buying a bible would destroy her freedom of religion.

  • Larry Koehn September 3, 2016, 3:17 pm

    I need to get this straight: People using medical pot can’t have guns but it is OK for street dopers?

  • Rouge1 September 3, 2016, 12:30 pm

    The same will apply to other prescription drugs, they are setting the presidence just a matter of time. I was prescribed morphine once so what’s the courts opinion on that? People with medical conditions no longer have their inalienable rights? Kind of like using the VA and social security to deny citizens of their constitutional rights.

    • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 10:08 pm

      Obama’s already hard at work on that. He’s told the Social Security Administration to set up an unelected kangaroo court to deprive retirees and those collecting disability payments of their civil right to keep and bear arms for what can only be considered arbitrary reasons in direct violation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.

      Where’s Congress in all of this? Silent, as far as I can tell. Next, every cancer patient receiving pain medication, no matter how mild, will be robbed of their gun rights.

      You’re right, the precedents Obama is setting – if allowed to stand unchallenged in court – will accumulate, and if the Broom Rider is elected President, she’ll only deny more and move of us civil rights spelled out in the Constitution, while adding “rights” for other people to pick our pockets without any Constitutional justification at all.

      • Gary Marsh September 7, 2016, 4:26 pm

        Broom Rider hardly describes her for all the harm she will do to those of who own guns and abide by the very laws that have been set down by Congress & Lawmakers. People like her should not be allowed to run for dogcatcher let alone Comander in Chief of this great country that we all have fought & died for.

  • Matt September 2, 2016, 7:14 pm

    I spent 23 years in law enforcement and can honestly say I never had anyone high on weed become violent or threating it was pretty much the opposite. Now alcohol and other drugs are a whole different story. The only time weed became a problem was when other drugs were added to it such as angle dust or dipped in formaldehyde. In those cases weed wasn’t the problem it was the added drug. Stupid outdated thinking on the courts part, the whole situation is absurd the federal government give the ok for states to legalize in one hand and in the other carries a big stick in the other. The cops have more important thing to deal with weed.

    • Steve September 2, 2016, 8:47 pm

      A very common sense response from a person who has do administer the Law every day.

    • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 10:17 pm

      I agree. Anyone who’s a threat to self or others under the influence of marijuana would be dangerous under the influence of alcohol or one double chai latte too many.

      It’s in the interest of all Americans to rollback the nanny state in its entirety, repealing not just intrusive gun laws and regulations but the rat’s nest of drug laws which don’t prevent drug use, drug violence, or drug deaths. They simply give organized crime a monopoly on drugs we could be regulating for safety and taxing (to support testing them for safety).

      With respect to the law enforcement community who’ve had to enforce these laws (me among them earlier in my life), drug laws don’t protect us – they undermine the idea that you’re responsible for your own choices. If you commit a crime under the influence of drugs – cough syrup or cocaine, makes no difference – you decided to impair your judgment to begin with, and your poor choices ought to make you responsible for every crime you commit. That’s a lot better than drug laws that make people criminals for taking a drug the government decides MIGHT make them do bad things,

    • Tom September 8, 2016, 4:21 pm

      Great Respect to You and thanks for your service, I was Army Air-Cav. in R.V.N. ’71 and when treated with chemo. for 10 mos.
      pot kept me alive helping with nausea and no appetite. and the addition of P.T.S.D. which pot helps without making a zombie out of me. Hep.C is gone. If nothing else let the Vets. get it (pot) and Ammo (the point) we are ready to defend (again) our Country! And if the feds. do not like it, Guess we’ll run what we brung and pray that’s plenty! POLITICIONS ( not veterans and the dis-
      abled] are there to Preserve our RIGHTS. SO (AGAIN) we would LOVE to save this COUNTRY when necessary against foreign and domestic enemies!!!

  • nathan September 2, 2016, 7:06 pm

    Be registered to vote…WE THE PEOPLE…are the ones that can make changes to laws…and if law enforcement is not following the rule of law…thats when YOU must know the law and use it…don’t rely on someone knowing the law just because they wear a badge…Lawyers have to look up the law..I’ve done it,so can you…it’s not that hard..We are not defenseless…exercise your rights.

  • D.K. September 2, 2016, 4:00 pm

    I thought that the THC was removed from medical version of pot. So users won’t get high. So what’s the problem?

    • Suz September 2, 2016, 8:25 pm

      No, the THC is greatly reduced but there is still some. It depends on the strain. Some strains are high in THC but its what helps those in a lot of pain like cancer.

  • skipNclair September 2, 2016, 3:34 pm

    The judge has no right to make this decision, as it goes against the 2nd amendment and again his stupidity shows for he claims to be educated and knows not what shall not be infringed upon means. Next he discriminates for he does not do the same for people under other drugs like alcohol which is a drug of the worst kind, and many other drugs that are worse then medical plants. I do not drink, nor smoke nor do drugs and I think this judge like many others over stepped his authority.

  • Robert Van Istendal September 2, 2016, 12:34 pm

    They must be stupid people on that court, Is it better to get drunk at home with whisky and beer, Is it better to take other drugs such as oxi etc. These liberal pieces of shit should just leave people the hell alone? I am 76 and never have taken Marijuana and i still think these stupid judges are idiots.

    • Soffitrat September 2, 2016, 5:36 pm

      Spot on!

    • Ken September 2, 2016, 5:47 pm

      They don’t call it “The 9th Circus” for no reason.

  • Charles September 2, 2016, 12:11 pm

    I just read the other day about an Alaska man that was contacted by state police to surrender his firearms owner card because he has access to medical marijuana.

    • Friar Bacon September 3, 2016, 4:15 am

      I thought Alaska was a constitutional carry state. Why do they have firearms cards?

      • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 10:23 pm

        Apparently the same people who elected stealth Democrat Lisa Murkowski to the US Senate have decided to abridge their own rights to keep arms, even if they say they’ve got “constitutional carry”.

  • michael schneck September 2, 2016, 12:11 pm

    the owner of the gun store should have the Right to Refuse to sell a gun to whomever he wants!!! It’s my store I should Be able to NOT sell or provide a service to. You have long hair, your bald, your white, your black. your gay, your short, Whatever the reason, its HIS and he has the right do deny sale or service

    • Roy September 2, 2016, 3:24 pm

      When I was growing up my Uncle owned a restaurant – on the door was a sign that read No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service. I don’t know that I have seen that sign in a long time – makes one wander, is it because litigious nut-wads sued to eat naked in restaurants, or did the nude diners simply use common sense.

      I agree completely, the GSO should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. It is an absolute certainty that if GSO sells a gun and that gun is used in a drug crime in which a bystander is hurt the same day – GSO will be sued. I’ll reserve my opinions of the 9th Circuit and it’s rulings (past and present) and say only I think they got the right answer, using the wrong reason.

  • Carl Sims September 2, 2016, 11:03 am

    So according to this ruling, if I purchased firearms and ammunition before I received my doctor prescribed medical marijuana card, I am COVERED? I just can’t purchase any more guns or ammo after I receive my card? This is so confusing and ridiculous. I moved any way now, from California to Florida. Can’t and don’t use now here in Florida since it’s illegal here. Was law enforcement for 16 years until I hurt my knee and back. The marijuana does help for pain, sleep, and relaxation. But instead, now I’m stuck taking the very addictive Percocet and Fentanyl! I can’t win!!!

    • Robert Butler September 2, 2016, 12:13 pm

      Carl, I feel your predicament. I was addicted to prescription narcotic pain relievers (15 years) , got off with Suboxon which was really tearing my body apart. Got off Suboxon with medical marijuana. My body is coming back to life, but had to relearn how to walk with newly resurrected previously narcotic suppressed muscles. The comfort of being able to control chronic pain using only the non-psychoactive part of the plant called CBD, vice the THC, has been a God sent solution WITHOUT the side effects. I don’t take it to get high, only a different healthy body comfort I’ve not had for over 15 years.
      Of course if federal law could be changed relieving our dependence on drug cartels and their violent society to being able to supply something that the huge pharmaceutical companies can’t make huge fortunes on. Right on…

    • John Moses September 2, 2016, 2:36 pm

      Hey Carl.. during those sixteen years as an LEO.. ever lock anyone up for cannabis possession?
      Just curious.

    • Jeffrey September 2, 2016, 6:23 pm

      I feel your pain!”thank you for your Leo service, I am Retired Military & 1st responder I To got hurt on the job and am stuck taking damn pills every day for my pain. I was able to start reducing the ammount but I just had my 8th surgery on my back and 38th on my right elbow. I was on the Fentayl patch but they kept falling off in the summer so I was only on the patch for a long time but you know their are only so many patches in a box but liked them BecausecI didn’t have to worry about loosing my damn pills and not having to do anything but change a patch every 3 days but now I’m stuck back on the pills and hate it. I’m not addicted ( I don’t take them to get high) and wished I didn’t have to take anything but with repeated surgeries the ones listed are partial list of the surgeries I’ve had becaus of being injured but like I said it sucks because like I said I was reducing the ammount on the patches I needed and keep my pain at a tolerable level only my body says I need more to control the pain because I’ve been on the shit so long. If I go to low I can’t walk or my pain comes back with a vengeance then my body gets sick because my body itself thinks it needs the meds. I don’t like feeling FKED up I love shooting and building gus and WAS going to get my MMC and my state probl will be legalizing it in Nov and now reading this I have to take the MMC off the table. Like the guy down below says he takes the part without the THC, and doesn’t get him high. I hate the smell of MJ and I’ve tried smoking it but hate that too. I know their are edibles Wichita wuld do but with the feds messing with ppl won’t sell yo a gun nor any ammo so it’s another form of gun control because when you shoot up what ammo you have your gun is just a paper weight or you culd make a kick ass lamp post out of a rifle but I know exactly what your talking about because Im in the same exact boat as you

    • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 10:38 pm

      Cancer since 1998, they cut a tumor from my stomach late last year, and I had chemo to my liver this year. Won’t describe my pain meds, because Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama’s little elves read this website.

      I’ve weaned myself from stronger pain medications to those which don’t impair me as my pain level went down, and I feel better all the way around (after four courses of radiation therapy, several surgeries and interventional procedures, and chemo., Fortunately, I haven’t had to take marijuana as part of that pain management strategy and I am glad I never gave in to the urge to do so, both to protect my civil rights in an intrusive regulatory tyranny, and because I can’t make a living apart from writing – I need my wits about me.

      I recommend you folks ask your physician if tramadol is an option for your pain. It provides good pain relief and is an atypical opioid agonist in that it’s also a selective serotonin and norepinephrine re-uptake antagonist – a fairly potent antidepressant which acts in the same way Prozac and Effexor do.

      It’s also regulated under Schedule IV of Federal and most state controlled substance laws, not Schedule II as morphine and oxycodone are. While the corrupt Obama administration and Democratic Party have demonstrated mere laws and equity won’t stop them taking our rights away, Schedule IV medications provide them with less excuse to do so.

  • Russ September 2, 2016, 10:47 am

    This ruling is as useful as a screen door on a submarine… the judges need to get their heads out of the sand and look around. Their are far more people taking prescription painkillers than ever recorded in history, approximately 2 million people in the US are taking prescription painkillers, this number again is increasing in the US, are these people being singled out as unlawful users? No they are not. From 1999 to 2014 there was approximately 165000 deaths as a result of overdoses on prescription pain killer like Oxytocin and Vicodin, this trend is continuing to this day “as reported by the CDC”. Let’s look at the number or people that have died as a result of Marijuana overdoses. That number is 0, there are no statistics for this, zero people have died as a result of Marijuana overdoses.
    Painkiller overdoses have increased at an alarming rate and still continue to grow, what is being done about this demographic of “legal, prescription users”? Nothing because the government and big pill manufacturing companies are still making money off of this sample group.
    So the logic used to make this leap to illegal Marijuana use and violence is like comparing the number of polar bears killed in Florida each year. Come on get a grip and stop this unjust and ridiculous statically twisting of reality.
    Gun ownership and the so called pre-purchasing of guns by a Marijuana user is again a statically impossible jump to make. This rational is inconclusive for any justification for the government’s gun grabbing and fleecing of the people.


    • Billbad September 2, 2016, 2:01 pm

      Oxytocin? Lol. Just thought it was funny.

    • Roy September 2, 2016, 3:47 pm


      You are ignoring the big pink elephant in the room – Rx drugs cause trillions of dollars to change hands – the Rx holder (note, I said the person to whom the Rx was written, not necessarily the individual ingesting said drug) earns money, pays taxes, then buys medical insurance (don’t get me started) and then goes to Doctor with pain (reason not important). Now Doctor bills insurance 500X the reasonable amount for service rendered and issues Rx because pharma keeps Dr in business. Without going off on a 75-page discourse, insert your own visceral reaction to the following: insurance companies, doctors, drug dealers, politicians, ads on TV telling us to ask for Rx, and Plaintiff’s lawyers who sue when you actual take advice and ask Dr. to Rx drugs . . . .

      Bottom line, everything the Government does is designed to make money change hands because taxes are collected every time money changes hands. Medical and pharma move more money in a day than most industries move in a year. I would venture to guess medical cost (including doctors, pharma, and medical insurance) move more money in one day than the entire firearms industry (including ammo, parts, gun ranges, training, and firearms themselves) move in a decade.

    • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 10:54 pm

      DEA is as useful as a screen door on a submarine. Their policy on marijuana use is to state no scientific evidence exists on the comparative safety of marijuana (regulated as a Schedule I controlled substance which allegedly has no legitimate medical use) and other medications less restrictively regulated but known to have worse side effects (including a much higher liability to cause addiction). Then they ignore the rulings of their own administrative law judges who issue detailed rulings on existing evidence on the safety and effectiveness of marijuana for medical use, and strongly discourage studies which might settle the issue one way or another.

      The War on Drugs is a billion-dollar business. If drug laws went away, that money would stop supporting a range of defense, aerospace and other contractors who support civilian drug interdiction efforts. The slice of the defense budget supporting drug interdiction would go away, too. Perhaps more ominously for some of our bought-off politicians, organized crime would lose a steady income stream – the only thing they’d be able to do is smuggle untaxed, unregulated drugs in.

      If relatively safe, legal drugs became available, and were regulated and taxed accordingly, the government would have much more control over the Schedule I controlled narcotics than they now do, and organized crime would no longer be able to reap obscene profits just by bringing inferior goods into this country where no one would buy them if they could go to Wal-Mart and buy clean drugs over the counter.

      Would hard drugs continue to be abused if they were legal? Yes. They are now, and those people motivated to take them already are taking them. We’d just stop pretending Americans were free men and women if we stopped regulating their lives in every possible way, restricting their civil rights in more and more ways “for their own good”.

  • Kalashinkov Dude September 2, 2016, 10:21 am

    The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The 9th Circuit Court is no longer in authority. That court has already ruled illegally in several high profile cases against our 2nd Amendment. That court has lost authority to decide any case which effects me. Let the 9th Circuit Court come and take my guns.

  • Jack September 2, 2016, 10:19 am

    Don’t use drugs if you want to be sure to keep or purchase firearms. If pot users want to stay stoned then they don’t need firearms. I don’t have issue when people are not under the influence of a narcotic, but if they are, then no way because that is no different than driving under the influence in both instances someone could be hurt, intentionally or unintentionally. Yes, I realize driving is a privilege and gun ownership is a right. Though, when you look at it realistically these days, it’s treated as a privilege. Otherwise ownership would be unimpeded by criminal records, drug abuse etc etc. It’s semantics to argue about which substance is worse! Alcohol and narcotics, be it crack, heroin, marijuana or PCP, are all mind altering substances which affect the user substantially. Otherwise they wouldn’t abuse them, maybe some people may be ok stoned, but others are not and giving them a firearm is a problem. You know how it goes with laws, one size doesn’t fit all and someone is always going to be pissed off about it. Besides, abusing drugs is a plague anyway and is causing untold amounts of bloodshed, violence and misery! Why encourage it?

    • Robert Butler September 2, 2016, 12:25 pm

      Hey Jack I agree with a lot you wrote about. I do find you to be ignorant about medical marijuana use, “stoned”, “mind altering” are incorrect terms to use. The non-psychoactive part of marijuana, CBD, does not stone you or mind alter you. The 15 years I was addicted to prescription narcotics was more mind altering than my daily use of CBD vape or tincture.

      • Kalashnikov Dude September 2, 2016, 4:58 pm

        CBD or THC medical marijuana is legal in my state for use when enrolled in the program. Feds have absolutely no right to infringe on any matter regarding firearms. The highest law of our land says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Some folks seem to think states have further rights to control guns, but the 2nd Amendment ties the federal governments hands period. Any judge, lawyer, or politician who says otherwise is a liar and a criminal, since these are bound by the laws of this nation, including our Bill Of Rights. Bill Of Rights for Christ sake! Do these assholes on the most liberal court in the nation even have an understanding of what that means? I do. And it will be enforced with any means required. These judges need to be removed from the bench. They can’t even read.

        • Rouge1 September 3, 2016, 12:47 pm

          Kalashnikov dude you are right. If the states are not bound and restricted by the constitution as the federal government is then the constitution is meaningless. If states can infringe on your second amendment rights they can just as easily take them all. Our country is so corupt.

    • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 11:25 pm

      The problem with your argument is that the number of Schedule I Federally-controlled substances grows steadily. All the Federal government needs to do to dramatically restrict gun ownership in this country is to make regulate more and more medications under Schedule I, or to expand on Barack Obama’s example and write regulations which deprive the civil right to keep and bear arms from people who must take antidepressants (suicide risk, after all), cough syrup (motor and cognitive impairment), muscle relaxants (drowsiness) or diabetes (because diabetics often have one or more of all those conditions).

      What Barack Obama has left us is a fundamentally transformed nation, all right. We’re now a bunch of wimps who won’t stand up and flip an elected dictator off.

      But the Ninth Circuit Court is being unfairly maligned here. Gun dealers would be prosecutable under Federal law if they knowingly sold guns to anyone they were aware were taking what the Federal government considers illegal drugs.

      Our state legislatures aren’t as isolated from us as Washington is. The gap between Washington and our state legislatures on a whole host of issues, not just drug policy, is clear evidence of that. State governments are already competent to regulate controlled substances; every state makes its own schedule by which those drugs are regulated. Congress ought to get the Federal government out of the drug regulation business and leave it in the hands of the several States. If you don’t like the drug laws where you live, move to a state with ones you like better.

  • ron September 2, 2016, 9:42 am

    Just the step in total ban. If medical marijuana in now, next will be states with legalized marijuana, followed by prescription drugs users in general.

    • Old Clockguy September 2, 2016, 12:51 pm

      Ya may want to rethink your premise there, ron, who do you suppose would be the biggest opposers to banning prescription drug sales?? None other than one of the largest money syphoning monopolies in the world, ……… take your time thinking this one out, who controls ALL of the drugs that are deemed “legal” in the USA?? It’s the ILDC, aka, the “International Lobby of Drug Cartel” (my title for them), aka, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and 13 others of the top 25 worldwide pharmaceutical companies who are home based right here in the USA. Surely you aren’t gonna try to convince us that these mega-drug monopolies would ever EVER attempt to jeopardize their annual KaBillions of dollars of profit to ensure that some guy, who is taking some Verapamil or some Metoprolol to control his high BP, won’t be able to buy a box of .22 ammunition to do some plinking?? These guys are making more on each pill that they pedal to the public than any clandestine drug cartel ever made pushing the poppy sap or some nice green bud or weed.

      • loupgarous September 5, 2016, 11:37 pm

        Big Pharma was in bed with Barack Obama from 2009 on. It’s why Mylan gets to charge people $600 for an EpiPen, and why the Food and Drug Administration covered up between 500 and 5,000 deaths due to Johnson &Johnson’s antibiotic Levaquin – when that happened, the husband of the Commissioner of the FDA was co-CEO of a hedge fund holding millions of dollars of stock in Johnson & Johnson. The commissioner and her husband were public supporters of and perhaps private donors to the Clinton Foundation.

        So Big Pharma doesn’t mind if Barack Obama deprives people who take their medications of the right to keep and bear arms, any more than it minds if DEA helps Big Pharma hike the price of pain medication ten times in ten years. They’re getting paid now for all the medications they sell to the elderly and disabled patients Obama’s screwing out of their right to keep and bear arms. They’ll get paid the same if they sell medications to free men or slaves.

  • Mike September 2, 2016, 9:27 am

    It doesn’t seem like much of a stretch to extend the same logic to all residents of OR, WA and Colorado where pot is legal and it could be possible that the residents use pot illegally (per Feds) and might therefore become violent. Using the 9th’s logic, these residents have a choice to move out of state if they want to continue to exercise their 2nd amendment rights.
    The 9th circuit court seems to have a long history of liberal decisions. It seems ironic that they are leveraging a liberal issue like MJ use to curtail 2 amendment rights.

    • Old Clockguy September 2, 2016, 1:11 pm

      Or why not simply apply the same rule that was applied to gays in the military some years ago, it seemed to work for them at the time?? “Don’t ask, don’t tell” seemed to work for them so why wouldn’t it work for someone who has blatantly “broken the law” by having a medical MJ card in their possession?? Generally speaking, it never did set well with me to make a law that exempted someone from something that another law made unlawful and then make that law, which exempted the person from another unlawful law, unlawful. Yeah, it’s about as clear as the mud that most of the politicians, who we voted for to watch over our rights and our responsibilities, wallow in each day that they vote another freebie into action to cover their retirement and their security and their livelihood and that of their entire family for generations to come. They worry more about their personal security team and who will be chauffeuring them around town in their government limousine than they do about some poor schlump who is in extreme pain 24/7 and smokes a little medical weed to try to get a small measure of relief so he can get a few hours of sleep once in awhile.

  • We are losing The Republic September 2, 2016, 9:08 am

    I found out yesterday that Obama has appointed 329 leftist judges to lifetime appointments .9 of the 13 circuit courts are now controlled by leftist .Now imagine how much further that will go including the Supreme Court if Hillary is elected . This case shows how the left thru every backdoor means WILL take our 2nd A rights .Your on antidepressants they will rule you can’t have firearms , pain meds same thing and with the courts stacked with liberals judges you;ll have no recourse . The lefts plan is coming to fruition ,they have played the long game and they are winning . I firmly believe if Trump doesn’t win this Country is over and we will have lost the Republic .

  • wasntme September 2, 2016, 8:46 am

    If I were this lady I would be looking into how the gun dealer found out about her medical health. That is private information. People even have to give permission for their spouse to take a message from their doctor for them. Unless she volunteered the information, seems like a huge invasion of her privacy.

    • Don R. September 2, 2016, 12:28 pm

      She did. Click on her name above (Rowan Wilson) for the rest of the story. BTW, she was in Nevada and she knew the gun store owner personally. He likely knew exactly what her status was.

    • Rouge1 September 3, 2016, 12:52 pm

      Sounds like a hippa violation. Maybe she used her card for id? lol

  • Mark September 2, 2016, 8:35 am

    Stupid Ruling…what about states where its legal and NO medical card needed like Col, Wash DC, Wash, Oregon?
    Should BAN gun sales to DRUNKS considering 95% of Arrested People are under the influence. Ban CAR sales to Drunks considering over 30000 killed by Drunk Drivers. THESE JUDGES ARE ALL DRUNK MAKING THESE STUPID DECISIONS!

  • Charles Loyd September 2, 2016, 7:57 am

    How can the government still be classifying weed as a class 1 substance. ( Have you ever seen a heroin user ) They turn into junkies real quick. People who smoke weed don’t need it every second of every day. Anyway enough of that. This bill is totally ludicrous. The evidence that they are basing this on makes me have to laugh due to transparency of our government and how they are initiating the ending of the second amendment rights because if you think about it…if it starts here where will it end?

    • steve September 2, 2016, 12:25 pm

      heroin shouldn’t be a schedule 1 drug either. according to federal law, a schedule one drug is one that poses significant abuse potential, AND has no accepted medical uses.
      how the hell can anyone, especially a doctor, say heroin has no medical uses? pain relief isn’t a legitimate medical use? relief of diarrhea, dysentery? cough relief? all of which the government has no problem with doctors prescribing any other opiate for (morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl, hydromorphone, etc.) But for some reason no heroin (even though heroin causes less nausea than morphine, which is why it is preferred over morphine in places like europe, Australia, etc., and there are much stronger opiates that are legal here (meaning legal by prescription.)
      Not to mention things like cocaine, PCP, ketamine, etc. are also legal (again, by prescription/doctor order.)
      Not that it’s a huge deal, or that I really care, it’s just the absurdity and the arbitrary nature of our drug laws since they first came into effect that is just crazy sometimes.

  • sudon't September 2, 2016, 7:15 am

    Oh yeah, the whole reason we made drugs illegal back in the twenties and thirties was because marijuana sent Mexicans and blacks into murderous rages, and enticed white women into a life of degradation. I mean, haven’t you seen the documentary film, “Reefer Madness”? Not that anyone would need any proof. We all know how violent marijuana addicts are. Thank God the Ninth Circuit hasn’t forgotten the important lessons learned in the early twentieth century.
    The only thing that puzzles me is, I thought drugs became harmless when prescribed by a doctor?

  • Mr Me September 2, 2016, 3:35 am

    That’s nonsense. People act like MJ users use it once and are messed up for life. I got news for you, it wears off just like alcohol (alcohol is much worse for you) and then you’re sober again. Being 2A supporters we should all be supportive of individual rights. If someone can get hammered off booze every night and still go buy a gun the next day at the nearest LGS then why shouldn’t a recreational MJ user be able to purchase a firearm let alone someone with a medical condition that has a legitimate reason AND a permit to purchase medical MJ? So much disinformation out there on weed……just like the disinformation the left blabs about guns. We should be FOR legalizing weed for recreational use AND medical.

    • John Moses September 2, 2016, 3:14 pm

      Now you’re talkin’ like a REAL Libertarian !!!

      Stay out of my pipe.
      Stay out of my holster.
      Stay out of my bedroom. (this one might not affect a lot of us, but all people should be treated equal)

  • Mark September 2, 2016, 2:51 am

    It’s worse to be drunk with alcohol than be high on marijuana. I’m a preacher who neither drinks nor smokes now for 42 years, and I used to do both. So I speak with experience. Yet I am still opposed to both and also, it’s a whole lot better than this onslaught of addictions of oxycodone/contin!!!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend