• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Attorney sues Portsmouth police over gun license denial! We need to follow this case

You one of the believers in the quaint, obsolete notion of equal protection under the law? Son, some people are more equal than others and deserve special rights and protections if society is to be fair...

I knew I should have taken that career path to Wall St. when I had the chance. [wink]

Isn't that just a $100 ticket in MA now?

Legally speaking, it doesn't matter to the feds...

The Gun Control Act (GCA) makes it unlawful for certain categories of persons to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms. 18 USC 922(g). Transfers of firearms to any such prohibited persons are also unlawful. 18 USC 922(d).

who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/how-to/identify-prohibited-persons.html

To the best of my knowledge, it's also still unresolved if the same prohibited person classification applies to medical marijuana users.

Correction, scratch that...

Bill Introduced in Congress to Exempt Legal Marijuana from Federal Gun Ban

WASHINGTON, DC — A bill has been introduced in Congress that would override a 2011 ruling by the ATF that says it is illegal for medical marijuana patients to buy or own guns.

Representative Jared Polis (D-Colorado) introduced HR 3483 on Thursday, and it was assigned to the House Judiciary Committee for review.

The text of the bill is not yet available, but the summary of the bill states that the intent of the proposal is “to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide exceptions from the firearm prohibitions otherwise applicable in relation to marijuana if its possession is lawful under State law.”

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms ruled in September 2011 that it illegal for registered medical marijuana patients to buy or own guns. In a memo released at the time, federal firearms dealers were notified that medical marijuana patients are “addicts” or “unlawful drug users” who cannot legally own weapons or ammunition.

“Any person who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether or not his or her state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or is addicted to a controlled substance and is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition,” Arthur Herbert, Assistant Director for Enforcement Programs and Services for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, wrote in the memo.

http://www.thedailychronic.net/2013...ress-exempt-legal-marijuana-federal-gun-laws/
 
Last edited:
Isn't that just a $100 ticket in MA now?


At the state level, yes. At the federal level, no. Besides that you would need to answer yes to the question regarding drug use on the FID/LTC application. If all that passes muster, there's the question of suitability.
 
Pardon me if this has been addressed. Is it plausible for a defense, since the NSA has now confirmed that it records all (or nearly all) electronic communications domestically; that one should reasonably assume that they are being recorded at all times?

This is not a wise ass answer or tinfoil hat nonsense. Not that I don't enjoy both.
 
Great. We have an attorney who has a record of poor performance (in a separate legal field no less) who thinks he is "hot shit" and is trying to make new case law. JFC.
"stupid is as stupid does" Forrest Gump

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

It reminds me of the case a few years back when Portsmouth and The State SJC wiped their ass with the guy from the Porstsmouth Water Dept. who left a copy of his carry permit on the desks of coworkers. He was deemed not a "suitable" person repped himself in court and lost his case. He couldnt take his loss and moved to Florida and left this case on our books. Thanks much, not. Bad cases lead to bad case law.
 
Weird. NES Shows two pages (23 and 24) of replies that I can't get to, so I'm posting this to see how the case turned out. The official that the lawyer tangled with, anti-gun police captain Mike Schwartz, retired after a judge found him, then-Chief Ferland, and other Portsmouth cops to be non-credible and self-serving in testimony in a notorious local case.

As I recall it, a cop manipulated a demented 90-something woman into willing him most of her property. There was a $25k payoff bequest to Schwartz in there, too.
 
I only see 217 posts, so if you have your settings at 10 per page, would be 21. I have 40 per page so i'm seeing 6 pages.
 
The official that the lawyer tangled with, anti-gun police captain Mike Schwartz, retired after a judge found him, then-Chief Ferland, and other Portsmouth cops to be non-credible and self-serving in testimony in a notorious local case.

As I recall it, a cop manipulated a demented 90-something woman into willing him most of her property. There was a $25k payoff bequest to Schwartz in there, too.

Do you have more info on that? I'm curious as well.
 
Its happened on a couple of threads in the last 2-3 months. Last time after It was reported it got somehow fixed, maybe just needs a mod to do something?
 
6 pages/#228

Are you guys with the mismatched post/pages trying in a different browser? Could be a stuck cookie/cache issue in how the pages are presented. Worth a shot at least.
 
6 pages/#228

Are you guys with the mismatched post/pages trying in a different browser? Could be a stuck cookie/cache issue in how the pages are presented. Worth a shot at least.

Its fixed now, im more curious about the result of the case, did he get his license?
 
Back
Top Bottom