Smoked a spliff? Toked on Herb? Can't get your LTC? We want to talk to you.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Comm2A

Director Comm2a
Dealer
NES Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
168
Likes
1,256
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Now that we have your attention: Do you or someone you know have a minor misdemeanor from way back when for getting caught with a joint preventing you from getting an LTC? We may be able to help. You or that person should contact [email protected] with your name, phone number, email and state what it is in your background that is preventing you from becoming licensed.
 
Last edited:
I like what Comm2a is doing. I feel they are providing a better service than GOAL. Its about time we go on the offensive. Another donation in bound.
 
I got a question for you Comm2A....With the up coming election in Mass and the ballot Question #3, medical marijuana. When it passes and becomes law what will it mean for someone who currently has a LTC and goes to get a medical marijuana card so they can own/grow medical marijuana? Will are names be added to some FBI list as a prohibited person? Will we lose our LTC?
 
I got a question for you Comm2A....With the up coming election in Mass and the ballot Question #3, medical marijuana. When it passes and becomes law what will it mean for someone who currently has a LTC and goes to get a medical marijuana card so they can own/grow medical marijuana? Will are names be added to some FBI list as a prohibited person? Will we lose our LTC?

My guess is you will have to answer "yes" to the pesky drug question that requires a "no" answer to pass NICS, as weed is still an illegal substance at the federal level. Just my guess though.
 
My guess is you will have to answer "yes" to the pesky drug question that requires a "no" answer to pass NICS, as weed is still an illegal substance at the federal level. Just my guess though.

I wonder if that will DisQual me from "passing" the NICS check? Most likely yes......
 
I haven't seen the NRA or GOAL openly offer to help people, yet they always want my money. COMM2A on the other hand is always openly offering to help people. If you don't already donate to COMM2A I suggest you start so they can continue to help the people of this state!
 
I got a question for you Comm2A....With the up coming election in Mass and the ballot Question #3, medical marijuana. When it passes and becomes law what will it mean for someone who currently has a LTC and goes to get a medical marijuana card so they can own/grow medical marijuana? Will are names be added to some FBI list as a prohibited person? Will we lose our LTC?

The BATFE has taken the position that a medical MJ card is an indication that the holder is the user of an unlawful substance and, as a result, an FFL dealer may not knowingly sell to such a person. I am not aware of any cases of the feds maintaining a database of medical cards for NICS purposes, but I have read that holding a medical MJ card in CO dsqualfies one for a CO CCW permit.

The feds standard is "current user", so a long past MJ conviction does not lock one in as a PP person unless a felony or > 2 year misdemeanor.

Curiously, MGL *prohibits* issuance of an LTC to anyone with a MJ criminal conviction, but concurrently prohibits the use of a civil MJ citation against an individual in any licensing determination or state benefit. As a result, the *identical* action can either make one a PP, or be something that cannot be used against the applicant, depending on when it happened.

Yes, there is still suitability. A LE agency can deny an applicant for a reputaiton for drug use, but may not consider a MJ citation in making the licensing decision.
 
The BATFE has taken the position that a medical MJ card is an indication that the holder is the user of an unlawful substance and, as a result, an FFL dealer may not knowingly sell to such a person. I am not aware of any cases of the feds maintaining a database of medical cards for NICS purposes, but I have read that holding a medical MJ card in CO dsqualfies one for a CO CCW permit.

The feds standard is "current user", so a long past MJ conviction does not lock one in as a PP person unless a felony or > 2 year misdemeanor.

Curiously, MGL *prohibits* issuance of an LTC to anyone with a MJ criminal conviction, but concurrently prohibits the use of a civil MJ citation against an individual in any licensing determination or state benefit. As a result, the *identical* action can either make one a PP, or be something that cannot be used against the applicant, depending on when it happened.

Yes, there is still suitability. A LE agency can deny an applicant for a reputaiton for drug use, but may not consider a MJ citation in making the licensing decision.

Is there a source you can cite for the MJ citation not being used in a licensing decision?
 
Is there a source you can cite for the MJ citation not being used in a licensing decision?

MGL Chapter 94C, Section 32L (http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXV/Chapter94C/Section32L) which reads in part:

Except as specifically provided in ″An Act Establishing A Sensible State Marihuana Policy,″ neither the Commonwealth nor any of its political subdivisions or their respective agencies, authorities or instrumentalities may impose any form of penalty, sanction or disqualification on an offender for possessing an ounce or less of marihuana. By way of illustration rather than limitation, possession of one ounce or less of marihuana shall not provide a basis to deny an offender student financial aid, public housing or any form of public financial assistance including unemployment benefits, to deny the right to operate a motor vehicle or to disqualify an offender from serving as a foster parent or adoptive parent. Information concerning the offense of possession of one ounce or less of marihuana shall not be deemed ″criminal offender record information,″ ″evaluative information,″ or ″intelligence information″ as those terms are defined in Section 167 of Chapter 6 of the General Laws and shall not be recorded in the Criminal Offender Record Information system.

Note that a MJ citation cannot even be recorded in CORI.
 
Smoked a spliff...[rofl]

Sorry, have not heard that in a while. Looking forward to Monday when I get paid to sending you guys money.
 
it sucks that the fed still has such an ignant way of looking at marijuana. it sucks more when you realize that its not about preventing social harm as much as it is protecting the profits of big pharma and alcohol.

A relative, who knows that I am a huge supporter of question 3, sent me a "study" by the heritage foundation. I sent it right back saying, yeah, the people who support heritage include Coors and drug company shareholders. Why in this age of information we have at our fingertips, people still buy the Reefer Madness bullshit is beyond me.

Gar.
 
i agree with this, i find it hard to believe that you are a bad guy for smoking some weed. If you had real criminal offences i could see disqualification but not for a doobie.

maybe im wierd?[tinfoil]

Dom
 
″An Act Establishing A Sensible State Marihuana Policy,″

That article spells it marihuana multiple times... Curious WHO ELSE, ANYWHERE spells it that way? Why would the state purposely use the more obscure spelling?
 
″An Act Establishing A Sensible State Marihuana Policy,″

That article spells it marihuana multiple times... Curious WHO ELSE, ANYWHERE spells it that way? Why would the state purposely use the more obscure spelling?

Marijuana is an obscure word, from the Spanish word marihuana. This term was only used to link the plant to Mexicans, and confuse the AMA. The correct term is cannabis or hemp. Please, use the correct term. I would love to see the word "marijuana, marihuana" removed and replaced with the correct term.
 
Last edited:
my logic is this, and it may be skewed...Ever seen any pot heads making trouble, destroying property, and or killing people? uhhh no they are glued to thier bean bag chair naked eating cheetos!
 
″An Act Establishing A Sensible State Marihuana Policy,″

That article spells it marihuana multiple times... Curious WHO ELSE, ANYWHERE spells it that way? Why would the state purposely use the more obscure spelling?
Probably the same reason they use the term "zoobow" in the weapons statute.
 
my logic is this, and it may be skewed...Ever seen any pot heads making trouble, destroying property, and or killing people? uhhh no they are glued to thier bean bag chair naked eating cheetos!

Whoa hey now....Dont bunch all pot heads into what you see in movies and tv...I know tons of pot heads that smoke everyday and go on to do awesome stuff. I went to high school with a kid that use to smoke a joint at the end of every day and did all his homework and papers,,he was a straight A student. Sure lots of people use weed to relax, some people drink some beers to do that.
I use to know a guy who sold it, we would see BMWs, Cadillacs, audis.... pull up to the house, lawyers, doctors and even a few LEOs would buy stuff from him. Sorry went on a bit of a tangent there....hahaha
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom