[deleted] t1_iwio0cg wrote
Jake_FromStateFarm27 t1_iwiqehp wrote
>Which can't be renewed and can never be bought again
You have to renew your med card annually so you can. Additionally its a gray area but if your med card is not for treating a mental health issue there is some room although still a gray area. Licenses are denied because of mental health not because of specifically use of cannabis although it can still be used to discriminate.
>Also it's technically illegal I believe to even own the gun if you are a user. So if you have guns, and are high etc that can be an issue.
It's not. It's a legal gray area (not a lawyer) again specifically since we do discriminate firearm purchases for mental health discrepancies not because you are high and then irresponsible.
>If you use weed no matter how, you then have to say yes on the form and be denied
Just blatantly false information.
>So you will give up your right to ever buy a gun again.
You can renew your firearm license when your mmj card expires although you will probably still be flagged and most likely have to go through different channels to update this information.
>Then I believe that only applies to the form and you can get them at the good ol' Gun show. private party etc (non straw of course)
You have to register all purchases whether you buy from a big box or from a gun show or private owner. It's illegal otherwise and the original owner would be holding themselves severely liable if that were to happen since they can literally trace it back to you. I have gone to plenty of gun shows in the past and I've had to fill out paperwork all the time to register my purchase and their transfer.
[deleted] t1_iwir0ng wrote
[deleted]
Jake_FromStateFarm27 t1_iwiv04s wrote
Ya im not a lawyer, but that's not what legal gray area means either and what you suggested above is just blatantly wrong. Be responsible educate yourself and weigh the pros and cons of a med card vs your right to purchase firearms.
[deleted] t1_iwivnex wrote
[deleted]
Jake_FromStateFarm27 t1_iwixlu6 wrote
Ah yes the extensive experience of r/legaladvice University my bad! How about this take what you read on reddit with a grain of salt for what we've both said here included with that.
[deleted] t1_iwiy1as wrote
[deleted]
Jake_FromStateFarm27 t1_iwj17nw wrote
>The fact you're even arguing it proves my point. Some judges will rule different lmao.
That's not how logic works my friend. Arguing does not prove your point. I'm being polite.
>The ambiguous aspect you're debating is proving my point
Nothing is ambiguous.
>However no, it's not from legal advice.
Neither what we are sharing is legal advice especially what you continue to insist on. You and are both speaking from limited knowledge. If you wanna confirm or deny anything we've said back it with a source please.
>However, my dad is a lawyer so sometimes if I'm curious I'll give him a call and ask.
So you confirm like I said you're not a lawyer even though you insinuated so. That said there are plenty of individuals in politics that do not have a legal background yet write policy, laws, all as elected officials.
>You even stated you're not a lawyer, if I have one in my family I would believe him over you
Get the fuck out of here with that idiotic logic lmao. I have attorneys in my family as well that doesn't mean I inherit their actual knowledge and skills or get to speak from a position of authority.
Anyone can read and interpret the law its all publicly available, that doesn't mean anyone is as knowledgeable as an actual legal attorney or pretend to be all knowing because "My DaD iS a LaWyEr" . Grow up.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments