Oklahoma SQ788 IS NOT MEDICAL PAC Forms

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
11,766
16,190
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
The 9th got it right. Same way the feds could go in and bust every legal grower/seller etc and toss them away for 20 or 30 years.

Until the feds address the issue it is going to be a huge potential problem. If they reschedule, it will fall off of the gun list and not interfere with those laws. Same way opiods don't fall in that category.

Question E on the firearms form explains it. If it is rescheduled and you have a prescription you would become a lawful user and that's ok.

https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download

e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.
I think I probably wasn't clear on what I meant by the 9th circuit got it right, they got it right without question on the legal end. Here's where I probably wasn't clear, I think the state should be able to prohibit you from being in possession (not owning) a firearm if you are taking any type of mood altering drug/medication - legally prescribed or not.
I liken it to the guy who is on prescription pain meds and says they don't affect him or drinks a few beers and says, hey I'm a better driver when I'm a little tipsy because I'm more careful, I don't want to prohibit him from owning a car but as long as we have drunk driving laws (which I don't necessarily favor but they are there), I don't want him behind the wheel.
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,533
9,426
243
50
Bixby-Bristow OK
I think I probably wasn't clear on what I meant by the 9th circuit got it right, they got it right without question on the legal end. Here's where I probably wasn't clear, I think the state should be able to prohibit you from being in possession (not owning) a firearm if you are taking any type of mood altering drug/medication - legally prescribed or not.
I liken it to the guy who is on prescription pain meds and says they don't affect him or drinks a few beers and says, hey I'm a better driver when I'm a little tipsy because I'm more careful, I don't want to prohibit him from owning a car but as long as we have drunk driving laws (which I don't necessarily favor but they are there), I don't want him behind the wheel.
The firearm issue is a strange one. The constitution is an outline of what the federal government can do. It's there to limit the power of the federal government. If it's not a power granted to them then it is a state power. The second amendment pretty clearly defines firearms under federal jurisdiction. I would think that would mean any state law would have to comply with federal law in that case.
 

RPG

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Sep 28, 2017
530
1,184
93
Edmond, OK
https://newsok.com/article/5599698/oklahomans-must-choose-between-their-guns-and-medical-marijuana

Oklahomans must choose between their guns and medical marijuana

Oklahomans voted to approve state-sanctioned medical marijuana Tuesday, but marijuana use continues to be illegal under federal laws that concern both possession and gun ownership.

"Unlawful use of marijuana is a prohibiter from possessing firearms and ammunition under federal law," said Meredith Davis, public information officer for the Dallas regional office of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. "If you hold a license to use marijuana for medical use, there's no exception for that prohibition under federal law."


"If you possess a medical marijuana card, it's presumed that you're a user," she said. "So you cannot possess, you can't transfer, you can't ship firearms or ammunition if you hold that license."
 
Feb 27, 2018
415
293
63
118
Tulsa
www.tulsaworld.com
Good morning. Several things from today's edition to share, starting with...

A special session to deal with regulating medical marijuana under the terms of State Question 788 appears a diminishing prospect as legislative leaders say they’re content to let the state Department of Health do the work.


“We’re working closely with the Department of Health,” House Majority Floor Leader Jon Echols, R-Oklahoma City, said in a telephone interview. “If they say they need a special session, I’m OK with that. If we can do it through the Department of Health, I’m fine with that.”



Senate Majority Leader and President Pro Tem-designate Greg Treat, R-Oklahoma City, said in a conference call with reporters that he doesn’t know whether a special session will be necessary.
Link

Also, an update to the firearm possession/medical marijuana issue...

“My phone has been burning up with it,” said Don Spencer, president of the Oklahoma 2nd Amendment Association. “I’ve had a lot of questions from people about concealed carry, and at this point it looks like you can still acquire a permit to carry in Oklahoma, but it would still be a federal crime if you own, possess or carry a gun.”


The problem is that it is a violation of federal firearms and drug enforcement laws to possess both marijuana and a firearm. With more than half the households in Oklahoma reporting someone in the home owns a gun, conflict over the laws in this state seems inevitable.



“I said six months ago we weren’t going to deal with this unless it passed, and doggone if it didn’t. Now I’m diving in,” Spencer said. “There are a lot of moving parts.”



The law dates back to the 1993 Brady Act, which amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 to reference provisions of the Controlled Substances Act, stating that “it shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person is an unlawful user of, or addicted to, any controlled substance.”
Link



Finally, an excerpt from today's editorial:

The state Health Department has drawn up 61 pages of proposed rules, and Gov. Mary Fallin is said to be considering a special session of the Legislature to consider new laws.


...


Here are some areas that seem reasonable for clarification within rules or laws:



• Who can prescribe a medical marijuana license? It seemed clear to us that the petition intended board-certified physicians — medical doctors and osteopathic physicians — but not other medical professions such as veterinarians and podiatrists, as SQ 788 opponents suggested in their advertising. Define that.
Link
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2007
7,302
6,377
1,743
Yukon, OK
Oh sure... The one time I vote in support of something on the assumption that they'll at least tweak a few things is the one time they actually just leave it alone... lol
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,171
8,092
1,743
Oh sure... The one time I vote in support of something on the assumption that they'll at least tweak a few things is the one time they actually just leave it alone... lol
I still see tons of social networking postings from people saying employers can not terminate you for testing positive as long as you have a prescription and saying that these new rules cover them.

Me thinks there’s going to be a rude awakening for quite a few people.
 

jetman

Federal Marshal
Nov 27, 2004
11,025
8,070
1,743
Edmond Oklahoma
https://twitter.com/govmaryfallin/status/1012768472168894464?s=21
In other words....it's summertime, it's hot, and we'd rather hang out by the pool. Don't make us do work.

It's funny though. All those doom and gloom commercials about how bad of a bill it was and the legislature is now all, "meh, looks good to us, carry on."
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2007
7,302
6,377
1,743
Yukon, OK
I still see tons of social networking postings from people saying employers can not terminate you for testing positive as long as you have a prescription and saying that these new rules cover them.

Me thinks there’s going to be a rude awakening for quite a few people.
Yeah, I just don't see how people think that just because it's legal doesn't mean it can't be against company policy...
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,171
8,092
1,743
In other words....it's summertime, it's hot, and we'd rather hang out by the pool. Don't make us do work.

It's funny though. All those doom and gloom commercials about how bad of a bill it was and the legislature is now all, "meh, looks good to us, carry on."
Guess Townie’s reverse psychology voodoo worked. Because he was all “the legislature is going to chop it all to pieces anyways and it won’t stand as written.”

LOL. Once again, Townie was wrong.
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,533
9,426
243
50
Bixby-Bristow OK
Yeah, I just don't see how people think that just because it's legal doesn't mean it can't be against company policy...
If I recall I believe the law explicitly states companies can not fire a prescription holder for testing positive. Kind of like they can't fire you for taking other prescription drugs.

The lawsuits that are sure to be filed will determine the outcome of that one. Companies start losing a bunch of money in lawsuits, I guarantee policies will be changed. Companies challenge the legality in court and win people will put down the pot to keep their job.
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2007
7,302
6,377
1,743
Yukon, OK
If I recall I believe the law explicitly states companies can not fire a prescription holder for testing positive. Kind of like they can't fire you for taking other prescription drugs.

The lawsuits that are sure to be filed will determine the outcome of that one. Companies start losing a bunch of money in lawsuits, I guarantee policies will be changed. Companies challenge the legality in court and win people will put down the pot to keep their job.
I know what it explicitly states (and that's one of the aspects that I thought needed some more work). Just because someone has a script for it doesn't mean they're magically unaffected by marijuana though... If they disclose up front with their employer then that's one thing but if they just show up then that puts everyone at risk. I believe the policy at my work is that if you're going to have to take a drug that may result in you being impaired, you have to notify management (not about the specific drug being taken for privacy reasons, just it's effects) so they can temporarily adjust your work responsibilities for safety reasons.
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,171
8,092
1,743
If I recall I believe the law explicitly states companies can not fire a prescription holder for testing positive. Kind of like they can't fire you for taking other prescription drugs.

The lawsuits that are sure to be filed will determine the outcome of that one. Companies start losing a bunch of money in lawsuits, I guarantee policies will be changed. Companies challenge the legality in court and win people will put down the pot to keep their job.
I was under the impression that the precedent has already been set in Colorado. Employee took and Employer to court for terminating him after testing positive for "medical" marijuana and the courts ruled with the Employer. Courts stated that a company did not have to change their zero tolerance drug policy that any failed drug test was grounds for immediate termination.

Sorry, but if I knew my daughters bus driver tested positive for weed at any point, on any day, I do not care if it's medical or not... I want him terminated. He/she can go find a job that doesn't endanger others lives because of his selfishness.

Like stocking shelves at WalMart.
 

RPG

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Sep 28, 2017
530
1,184
93
Edmond, OK
I still see tons of social networking postings from people saying employers can not terminate you for testing positive as long as you have a prescription and saying that these new rules cover them.

Me thinks there’s going to be a rude awakening for quite a few people.
For example:

https://www.transportation.gov/odapc/medical-marijuana-notice

DOT "Medical Marijuana" Notice
Updated: Monday, October 30, 2017

DOT Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance Notice

Recently, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued guidelines for Federal prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the use of “medical marijuana.” http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/medical-marijuana.pdf

We have had several inquiries about whether the DOJ advice to Federal prosecutors regarding pursuing criminal cases will have an impact upon the Department of Transportation’s longstanding regulation about the use of marijuana by safety‐sensitive transportation employees – pilots, school bus drivers, truck drivers, train engineers, subway operators, aircraft maintenance personnel, transit fire‐armed security personnel, ship captains, and pipeline emergency response personnel, among others.

We want to make it perfectly clear that the DOJ guidelines will have no bearing on the Department of Transportation’s regulated drug testing program. We will not change our regulated drug testing program based upon these guidelines to Federal prosecutors.

The Department of Transportation’s Drug and Alcohol Testing Regulation – 49 CFR Part 40, at 40.151(e) – does not authorize “medical marijuana” under a state law to be a valid medical explanation for a transportation employee’s positive drug test result.

That section states:

§ 40.151 What are MROs prohibited from doing as part of the verification process?
As an MRO, you are prohibited from doing the following as part of the verification process:
(e) You must not verify a test negative based on information that a physician recommended that the employee use a drug listed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. (e.g., under a state law that purports to authorize such recommendations, such as the “medical marijuana” laws that some states have adopted.)​
Therefore, Medical Review Officers will not verify a drug test as negative based upon information that a physician recommended that the employee use “medical marijuana.” Please note that marijuana remains a drug listed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. It remains unacceptable for any safety‐sensitive employee subject to drug testing under the Department of Transportation’s drug testing regulations to use marijuana.

We want to assure the traveling public that our transportation system is the safest it can possibly be.

Jim L. Swart
Director
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
Office of Drug and Alcohol
Policy and Compliance
Department of Transportation
October 22, 2009
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,533
9,426
243
50
Bixby-Bristow OK
Sorry, but if I knew my daughters bus driver tested positive for weed at any point, on any day, I do not care if it's medical or not... I want him terminated. He/she can go find a job that doesn't endanger others lives because of his selfishness.

Like stocking shelves at WalMart.
Weed stays with you on a test for 30 days. Just because someone test positive doesn't mean they are high or selfish while doing there job. Whats the difference between him smoking a joint last night or having a few drinks? Well if he smoked a joint at least he won't have a hangover while driving your daughter and most likely will be a better and safer driver than th eguy that had a few drinks. Of course he will test positive and the guy with the hangover won't.

That has always been my question on weed being legal. Do they have a how high are you test yet?
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
63,139
46,510
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
Weed stays with you on a test for 30 days. Just because someone test positive doesn't mean they are high or selfish while doing there job. Whats the difference between him smoking a joint last night or having a few drinks? Well if he smoked a joint at least he won't have a hangover while driving your daughter and most likely will be a better and safer driver than th eguy that had a few drinks. Of course he will test positive and the guy with the hangover won't.

That has always been my question on weed being legal. Do they have a how high are you test yet?
Some metabolites stay longer than 30 days.