You can smoke, but you can't hunt

Take a look if your a hunter or interested in purchasing a fire-arm. Vail Daily: You can smoke, but you can't hunt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreckenridgeOT

Take a look if your a hunter or interested in purchasing a fire-arm. Vail Daily: You can smoke, but you can't hunt

---

I would imagine this wouldn't hold up in court, since I could technically have the red card with recommendation from my doctor and not answer yes to that question.

The card/recommendation does not equal 'illegal use' in my opinion.

Could I stop smoking, answer that question, and then start smoking again? Sounds like a court case.

I was pulled over in Littleton for speeding this weekend, and I spent 40 minutes trying to assure the responding officers that I wasn't under the influence of marijuana. They most definitely conducted an investigation to see if I was under the influence of mmj.

I had my redcard out when he came up to the vehicle, my backpack with my medicine was on the seat next to me. He quite obviously smelled that I had mmj in my car. I mentioned that I was compliant. He said he couldn't care less about the amount that I had.

He took my info, called backup including a k9 unit. Three cars, four cops, one was obviously a supervisor. I got questioned three times by two different cops, all related to the last time I consumed marijuana, never once mentioned a field sobriety test or anything like that.

It was 9am, and I said I had smoked last before dinner the night before, 12-14 hours prior. The cop said they are going to start writing more DUID's than DUI's, and I totally believe him. He said it's the increase in abuse of the mmj system, this is how they're weeding out the 'abusers'.

He said off-the-record that the threshold is 8 hours. If I voluntarily disclosed that I had smoked any amount of pot in the last 8 hours, I would have been arrested and charged. Not a ticket, arrested, just like a DUI. I asked how they'd enforce guilt since there is no roadside way to tell when the last time I smoked, he says it's entirely dependent on how you answer, like they're giving you the opportunity to screw yourself.

So, if anyone gets pulled over, make sure the answer to that question is longer than 8 hours. Scary stuff, especially that I told the officer that I had a backpack full of marijuana. The only reason for their questioning was trying to get a DUID charge. Once they realized they wouldn't get me to admit to that, they let me go. He even asked, 'Oh come on, I know you guys. Are you sure you didn't smoke a couple hits when you got up this morning?'

Shady!

thanks for sharing that.

my red card will never come out unless I am accused, nor would I volunteer that the backpack is full of weed unless they forced a search. but that's just me ;)

this should be required viewing!
YouTube - BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

thanks for sharing that.

my red card will never come out unless I am accused, nor would I volunteer that the backpack is full of weed unless they forced a search. but that's just me ;)

this should be required viewing!
YouTube - BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters

---

Exactly, the less info the better. When I was a kid 30 years ago my friends dad got pulled over and when the cop walked up to the car he cracked the window just enough to slide his drivers license and registration to the cop, cop didnt say a thing and walked back to his car. A few minutes later the cop comes back and slides the license and registration back through the crack along with a ticket and my friends dad drove away. Neither said a word to each other, it was funny as shit. I always wonder how a cop would react nowadays to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

thanks for sharing that.

my red card will never come out unless I am accused, nor would I volunteer that the backpack is full of weed unless they forced a search. but that's just me ;)

this should be required viewing!
YouTube - BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters

---

I agree with you, but I am totally compliant with state law, so I knew it wouldn't be an issue. I don't want to get into details, but they weren't interested in the least.

I wasn't over half of my possession limit. I was transporting more than my normal stash so I wanted to make sure I gave the cop full disclosure. I'm sure I could have made an issue, but any one of those cops could easily have ruined my day.

He also mentioned very early on that he'd take a picture before he confiscates. He said if there wasn't a conviction, my medicine would have to be returned in the same condition it's in currently, and he's not about to take care of it if there isn't sufficient grounds to take it.

I'm just a patient, I don't resell my meds, I paid the fees to get legal, so I don't mind them verifying. I don't want to share the road with anyone who is under the influence of drugs, their threshold seems arbitrary and likely wouldn't stand up in court. But, someone has to get arrested and go to court before there is a precedent set on what limits constitute impairment. That's going to take awhile.

edit: the thing that concerned me, is that the cop was totally open and honest about them arresting people who admit to smoking within 8 hours or less. I'm sure that a lot of people would admit to smoking a joint a few hours prior thinking they're fine, when they're not. I just think people should be aware that the laws state we have to medicate in our homes.

The cop even asked if, "I drove home last night after smoking pot somewhere".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

thanks for sharing that.

my red card will never come out unless I am accused, nor would I volunteer that the backpack is full of weed unless they forced a search. but that's just me ;)

this should be required viewing!
YouTube - BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters

---

Exactly, I learned long ago, do not talk to the man ever, they are always looking for a reason, to arrest your Arse.

The key is whether your ability to drive is impaired, and to what degree. The law contains a presumption with respect to the alcohol content of your blood and its effect on your driving, so it always becomes a fight about BAC, even though the law speaks in terms of impairment. No such presumption exists with respect to mj, so a DWAID/DUID case would have to revolve around whether your ability to drive is impaired to the slightest degree (DWAID), or substantially (DUID). I think this is the correct terminology, it's been a long time. Watch for the law enforcement lobby (why should such a thing be allowed to exist?) to attempt to convince our idiot legislators, many of whom are ex-prosecutors, to codify some form of presumption for mj, either time from consumption to driving or something else. One of the reasons the law enforcement community has been against legalization (other than its effect on their livelihood0 is the lack of a quick and easy test to determine whether one is currently under the influence. I have heard that such a test is now available, although very expensive. If it comes down in price, and especially if legalization comes to pass, roadside tests for mj will become commonplace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I would imagine this wouldn't hold up in court, since I could technically have the red card with recommendation from my doctor and not answer yes to that question..

---

Did you read the article? I looked into this. When they say "illegal," they are talking about the feds definition. So... you are illegal according to the fed, therefore you cannot purchase weapons from a store or hold an concealed to carry license.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I was pulled over in Littleton for speeding this weekend, and I spent 40 minutes trying to assure the responding officers that I wasn't under the influence of marijuana. They most definitely conducted an investigation to see if I was under the influence of mmj.

I had my redcard out when he came up to the vehicle, my backpack with my medicine was on the seat next to me. He quite obviously smelled that I had mmj in my car. I mentioned that I was compliant. He said he couldn't care less about the amount that I had.

He took my info, called backup including a k9 unit. Three cars, four cops, one was obviously a supervisor. I got questioned three times by two different cops, all related to the last time I consumed marijuana, never once mentioned a field sobriety test or anything like that.

It was 9am, and I said I had smoked last before dinner the night before, 12-14 hours prior. The cop said they are going to start writing more DUID's than DUI's, and I totally believe him. He said it's the increase in abuse of the mmj system, this is how they're weeding out the 'abusers'.

He said off-the-record that the threshold is 8 hours. If I voluntarily disclosed that I had smoked any amount of pot in the last 8 hours, I would have been arrested and charged. Not a ticket, arrested, just like a DUI. I asked how they'd enforce guilt since there is no roadside way to tell when the last time I smoked, he says it's entirely dependent on how you answer, like they're giving you the opportunity to screw yourself.

So, if anyone gets pulled over, make sure the answer to that question is longer than 8 hours. Scary stuff, especially that I told the officer that I had a backpack full of marijuana. The only reason for their questioning was trying to get a DUID charge. Once they realized they wouldn't get me to admit to that, they let me go. He even asked, 'Oh come on, I know you guys. Are you sure you didn't smoke a couple hits when you got up this morning?'

Shady!

---

i would never take a road side anything especially for alcohol. they are designed for you to fail. profit profit profit. yes officer i took 40 rips of a bong and still havent OD i must be superman:thumbsup: you want to take me in, comon i know you guys...ha ha, ha ha


man...meded is a hell of a drug:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreckenridgeOT

Take a look if your a hunter or interested in purchasing a fire-arm. Vail Daily: You can smoke, but you can't hunt

---

i believe firearms is federal so they could deny for a federal offense. the question is how would they find out if the registry is confidential.



gotta go meded out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canaguy27

Did you read the article? I looked into this. When they say "illegal," they are talking about the feds definition. So... you are illegal according to the fed, therefore you cannot purchase weapons from a store or hold an concealed to carry license.

---

It's my opinion that possession of a redcard/being in the registry, doesn't automatically prove that you are breaking federal laws. Until I purchase medicine I'm not breaking federal law.

Are you saying that the act of getting a doctor's recommendation, getting his opinion that you could benefit from medical marijuana is a federal offense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

It's my opinion that possession of a redcard/being in the registry, doesn't automatically prove that you are breaking federal laws. Until I purchase medicine I'm not breaking federal law.

Are you saying that the act of getting a doctor's recommendation, getting his opinion that you could benefit from medical marijuana is a federal offense?

---

duh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEDEDCANNABIS

duh

---

If 'duh' means yes, can you please point me to relevant federal laws that I'm breaking by visiting a doctor and obtaining a piece of paper that says I might benefit from medical marijuana. Or, clarify what you're saying.

Obviously the Federal Government does see marijuana as medicine since there are federal medical marijuana patients. How can it be truely a voilation of federal law?

Toke of the Town - Federal Marijuana Patient Safe From The DEA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

It's my opinion that possession of a redcard/being in the registry, doesn't automatically prove that you are breaking federal laws. Until I purchase medicine I'm not breaking federal law.

Are you saying that the act of getting a doctor's recommendation, getting his opinion that you could benefit from medical marijuana is a federal offense?

---

You obviously didn't read the article or what I wrote.

You said

Quote:

---

I would imagine this wouldn't hold up in court, since I could technically have the red card with recommendation from my doctor and not answer yes to that question.

---

I said this:

Quote:

---

Did you read the article? I looked into this. When they say "illegal," they are talking about the feds definition. So... you are illegal according to the fed, therefore you cannot purchase weapons from a store or hold an concealed to carry license.

---

On one hand you are saying that you need mmj for your pain or whatever. Then on the other hand you are saying that you don't need it so you can buy a gun. If you don't need it, then you must turn your card in immediately. So you are committing a crime whatever way you chose to go.

All I said was it is illegal to purchase a gun from a store and/or to hold a ccw license with a red card.

Are you gunning for the Barkowitz award? No pun intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

He said off-the-record that the threshold is 8 hours. If I voluntarily disclosed that I had smoked any amount of pot in the last 8 hours, I would have been arrested and charged. Not a ticket, arrested, just like a DUI. I asked how they'd enforce guilt since there is no roadside way to tell when the last time I smoked, he says it's entirely dependent on how you answer, like they're giving you the opportunity to screw yourself.

Shady!

---

this is the way cops work. when you get pulled over they have to tell you why they are pulling you over and once they get your license and insurance (barring you don't have warrants etc) they have to tell you immediately if they are giving you a citation or not. a written warning is considered a citation. once they give you the citation you are free to go and don't have to answer another single question. period.

the cops have to disclose all of that info so they aren't "using their power" or holding anything over your head to intimidate or guilt you into confessing to something. anything they get after issuing a citation or releasing you is deemed voluntary. so they try to keep you talking and get you to divulge info.

hell, they can straight up lie to you with no repercussions.


-shake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canaguy27

You obviously didn't read the article or what I wrote.

You said

I said this:

On one hand you are saying that you need mmj for your pain or whatever. Then on the other hand you are saying that you don't need it so you can buy a gun. If you don't need it, then you must turn your card in immediately. So you are committing a crime whatever way you chose to go.

All I said was it is illegal to purchase a gun from a store and/or to hold a ccw license with a red card.

Are you gunning for the Barkowitz award? No pun intended.

---

I'm sorry if you thought I was discussing my own personal experience. I was asking a question using myself as a reference. I already smoke and am in possession, so I'm breaking federal law.

I was only posing a 'what-if' for someone who wanted both a medical card and a permit to carry.

I don't know enough about guns, but do you have to 'affirm' or otherwise state you are still in compliance with federal drug laws once approved? Couldn't I get a gun after the doc visit but before the MMC visit.

I'm just trying to find a way around the 'are you breaking federal law'. When I purchase a firearm, I'd like to answer that question honestly and in a way that would be legal. Hope that makes sense. We agree that either way we're going to be non-compliant at the federal level.

I don't have any plants and I don't have any guns, so I'm pretty far removed from getting the 'bartkowitz award', if that's how you're using that phrase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

If 'duh' means yes, can you please point me to relevant federal laws that I'm breaking by visiting a doctor and obtaining a piece of paper that says I might benefit from medical marijuana. Or, clarify what you're saying.

---

well perhaps i commented in haste, however from what i understand red flags will be investigated, the real question is how would they find out if the registry is sealed unless due process is used to view it. just remember at the fed level mj is terrorism and warrantless searches still exist (another casualty of war). all i mean is keep your nose squeeky clean and all should be good. red card could implicate one for further attention.

meded...comon:D get happy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I'm sorry if you thought I was discussing my own personal experience. I was asking a question using myself as a reference. I already smoke and am in possession, so I'm breaking federal law.

I was only posing a 'what-if' for someone who wanted both a medical card and a permit to carry.

I don't know enough about guns, but do you have to 'affirm' or otherwise state you are still in compliance with federal drug laws once approved? Couldn't I get a gun after the doc visit but before the MMC visit.

I'm just trying to find a way around the 'are you breaking federal law'. When I purchase a firearm, I'd like to answer that question honestly and in a way that would be legal. Hope that makes sense. We agree that either way we're going to be non-compliant at the federal level.

I don't have any plants and I don't have any guns, so I'm pretty far removed from getting the 'bartkowitz award', if that's how you're using that phrase.

---

the gun is irrelavant smoking mj is breaking the law at the fed level, period.

meded is a hell of a drug

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenster

Obviously the Federal Government does see marijuana as medicine since there are federal medical marijuana patients. How can it be truely a voilation of federal law?

Toke of the Town - Federal Marijuana Patient Safe From The DEA

---

yes however they wont reschedule it to a drug with mededicinal purpose despite the request of the american medical association. just because they have lab rats doesnt mean they are on our side:wtf:

meded-quality organics grown for superior potency, flavor and aroma