The South Dakota House of Representatives approved two bills that remind patients of the fact that medical marijuana use can prevent them from owning firearms in accordance with federal law. The legislation proposes to require the notice of the policy to be placed on cannabis patient application forms and at dispensaries. They would face daily fines for not complying.
The measure that relates to the application was passed by a large majority on Tuesday. The dispensary legislation was approved by a 42-27 vote.
Both measures were sponsored by Rep. Kevin Jensen, R. who cleared both the House Judiciary Committee and the House Floor last week.
This bill does not prevent anyone from obtaining a medical marijuana license. This bill doesn’t prevent anyone. Jensen stated on the floor before the vote on Tuesday that people are free to choose. “But the people should be able to make informed decisions.”
Jensen, who has been a firearms trainer and dealer for decades, said it is “amazing” how many people don’t know that the law exists.
Some industry stakeholders have argued that the bill mandating that notices about the federal statute must be posted in dispensary entrances, at each register and point of sale is more controversial.
Jensen addressed concerns in advance, insisting the policy wouldn’t cost dispensaries anything. He pointed out that the $250 fine per day that businesses will incur for noncompliance is only half of the fine federal regulators impose to stores that do not post tobacco-related warnings.
He said, “It is just a way to inform people that the law exists and that the penalty only exists so they can comply.”
The sponsor took another question from a member who wanted clarification about which agency was responsible for enforcing policy and collecting fines that would go to the general fund of the state. Jensen stated that the Department of Health will check the signs as part of routine inspections.
The bill requires that South Dakota medical marijuana dispensaries display the following sign:
“WARNING Federal Law prohibits possession of firearms by certain individuals that are marijuana users or addicts. See 18 U.S.C. “SS 922(g)”.
The law would be suspended once the Attorney General certifies that federal law does not prohibit the possession of firearms by marijuana users or addicts.
In numerous federal court cases, the Justice Department insisted that the ban was necessary. It argued at times that marijuana users who also own guns posed a unique threat, similar to allowing people with mental illnesses to possess firearms.
The Biden administration claimed that cannabis consumers with guns pose a threat to society, in part because they’re a data-google-interstitial=”false” href=”https://www.marijuanamoment.net/bidens-justice department says marijuana consumers are unlikely to store their weapons properly in the latest defense of federal ban/” rel=”noopener” target=”_blank/a> “unlikely”. The Biden administration claimed that cannabis consumers who own guns are a danger to society. This is because they are “unlikely to” store their weapons properly.
In a brief filed in the case, attorneys from the Justice Department argued that the firearm ban for cannabis consumers is justified by historical analogies to restrictions imposed on the mentally ill or habitually intoxicated during the period of ratification of the Second Amendment in 1791.
The federal government has claimed repeatedly that these analogues support limiting the gun rights of cannabis users. But a number of federal courts have ruled the marijuana-related prohibition unconstitutional. This has led DOJ to appeal several ongoing cases.
In October, the Justice Department made similar arguments during oral argument in a related but separate case before the U.S. Court of Appeals Eleventh Circuit. This case is about the Second Amendment rights for medical cannabis patients in Florida.
The attorneys in both cases also touched upon a U.S. Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ruling, Daniels v. United States from August that found a ban prohibiting people who use cannabis from possessing firearms is unconstitutional even if the marijuana was consumed for non-medical purposes.
DOJ had informed the Eleventh Circuit Court that it believed the ruling to be “incorrectly determined,”, and the department’s lawyer reiterated the government’s view that “there are reasons to doubt the foundations” in the appeals court’s decision.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma ruled last summer that the prohibition on people using marijuana possessing firearms was unconstitutional. The judge stated that the federal government’s justification for maintaining the law is “concerning.”
In U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, a judge ruled in April that banning people who use marijuana from possessing firearms is unconstitutional–and it said the same legal principle also applies to the sale and transfer of guns.
ATF wrote to Arkansas officials in August to warn them that the recently passed law allowing medical cannabis patients to get concealed carry licenses was “unacceptable” and could compromise the state’s alternative firearm licensing policy, which has been approved by the federal government.
issued a warning shortly after Minnesota’s Governor signed a bill legalizing cannabis into law in 2017. The agency reminded that those who use marijuana are prohibited from owning or purchasing guns and ammunition until the federal prohibition is lifted.
ATF will issue an advisory in 2020 that specifically targets Michigan and requires gun sellers conduct federal background checks for all unlicensed buyers. It said Michigan’s cannabis laws allowed “habitual marijuana consumers” and other disqualified persons to obtain firearms without a license.
A little-noticed FBI memo from 2019, which recently surfaced, shows that the federal government generally does not view it as a crime for medical cannabis caregivers or growers to own guns.
In the first half of the current two-year legislative session, Republican lawmakers filed two bills that focused on marijuana and gun policy.
Rep. Brian Mast, co-chairman of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus and a member of the House of Representatives, introduced legislation in May that would protect the Second Amendment right of marijuana users in states where the drug is legal. This bill would allow them to buy and possess firearms, which they are currently prohibited to have under federal law.
Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer (DNY) has promised to attach that legislation to the bipartisan marijuana banking bill, which advanced out of committee last September.
Mast is also sponsoring a separate Bill from Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV), in this session, which would allow medical marijuana patients to buy and possess firearms.
While Sen. Cory Booker, (D-NJ), said in July, that he believed the justice system had handled the prosecution of the president’s child effectively, he still believes that there is a double standard in the country, which has allowed presidents, members of Congress, and others to admit past marijuana use with impunity , while thousands of people who are less fortunate face punitive cannabis laws .
A ballot measure proposed in Colorado would eliminate marijuana use from the list of disqualifications for concealed carry permits. This could allow people who use the substance to carry concealed weapons in public.
Top Wisconsin GOP Lawmaker Unwilling To Amend State-Run Medical Marijuana Bill To Address Senate Republican Leaders’ Concerns
The post South Dakota House passes bill to fine medical marijuana dispensaries that don’t warn patients about federal gun ban first appeared on Marijuana Moment.
