PDA

View Full Version : IIRC, Federal law includes 10yr prison term for possession of both gun & illegal drug


Squid
03-11-2012, 4:41 PM
including any ammunition, and including marijuana possession.

This seems fully supported by mainstream gun rights groups like NRA who are pro-gun, but strictly anti-drug and anti-drug legalization.

Sure, it makes some sense for firearms safety that you shouldn't be 'on drugs' around loaded guns, but the first thing that strikes me about the Federal law is it isn't just for being under the influence of an illegal drug, or even for testing positive in a drug test.

It is an exact match for Forfeiture 'zero tolerance' drug laws that quickly had Law Enforcement thinking about fancy boats they could figure out a way to seize. Where one roach supposedly found on a yacht was good enough to seize a million dollar yacht.

Not all cops are crooked, but enough sure are, and what to do crooked cops plant when they plant evidence? Counterfeit money, stolen credit cards, child porn, illegal weapons, false ID? Never heard of any of those, although I guess it is possible.

Drugs are the what bad cops plant on people when they plant evidence.

There are various reason for this, like illegal drugs being less traceable and fact that it is more common to find someone who the cops "know" is a drug user or dealer but just doesn't have it 'on them'.

But the fact remains the courts are pretty much greased to accept a cops word that he found drugs on you without question, even if you show a clean drug test the next day and have no history of any drug use.

I've never heard of this Federal Law ever being invoked, even for people I've known on Fed probation and found with both felony drugs and illegal handgun(for 2nd time no less) by Federal probation officers.

But sure seems like the combo of planting drugs being a semi-standard practice in American law enforcement and a draconian 10 year prison term for first offense would be the "go to" law if the Govt ever decides to seize guns from totally law abiding citizens. It will be a choice of allowing your guns to be seized and agreeing to get probation, or having your guns seized and doing 10yrs.

Unlike things like "obstructing a police officer" or "disturbing the peace" where is seems a given for the judge to use his own judgment, a "find" can be considered an "absolute" and not up to any judge's discretion.

That will work because all the mainstream pro-guns groups are also all very anti-drug and will support it until it hits them. I'd even bet 1/2 of them will go to the gallows thinking the cops really did find some drugs, and blaming their baby-sitter's boyfriend.



Reminds me when I got my car towed by police after it stalled on a busy street and I ended up with a ticket for "open container" as well.

Then I go to court and it is for "Transportation of Marijuana" as well, which seemed really strange because I wasn't smoking any pot. My truck was also a semi-public vehicle on a large construction site, so I was thinking someone must have ducked in to smoke dope and ditched a roach or something, and I had a list of suspects. Or maybe the cops planted it.

To make a long story short, after working several lawyers, and several trips to the DA's window, just before "the trial" they say, "woops, we just typed it up wrong" Open Container is count (a) and Transportation of MJ is count (b) of same Code Section.

One thing I learned from all that is there is no lower limit for how much of any illegal drug qualifies for simple "possession"(or 'transportation') and, in theory, you could be charged for Cocaine Possession for the measurable amounts of cocaine found on almost all US currency. Test done on Paraphernalia for 'residue' count as "possession" and mostly don't include any amount, just "positive" on the test.

DannyInSoCal
03-11-2012, 4:54 PM
Potheads forget to buy gas all the time.

It's not your fault.

You are obviously a victim of a huge government conspiracy to frame construction workers...

:facepalm:

llamatrnr
03-11-2012, 4:56 PM
Potheads forget to buy gas all the time.

It's not your fault.

You are obviously a victim of a huge government conspiracy to frame construction workers...

:facepalm:

Ouch! :cool:

Meplat
03-11-2012, 5:09 PM
It is not just drugs. I have long been dismayed at the firearms enhancements associated with other crimes. In a world where a person can’t make it through an average day without breaking some law this is a very dangerous thing. Firearms enhancements always seem to have draconian penalties attached to relatively minor crimes that themselves carry much lower penalties. This has long been one of the things that upset me about organizations like NRA and CRPA. They can be as anti drug as they want but don’t mix the two. Don’t mix guns with any other politics. And we should not do it here either. It is a symptom of BGOS!


P. S. See, in the time it took me to write that you have already drawn two snipers. DON’T MIX GUN POLITICS WITH ANYTHING ELSE!!!

6172crew
03-11-2012, 5:22 PM
I know a Girl who is in for 35 years, 5 years of it was for handing a gun to a Felon who was working for the Feds. Even though her boyfriend asked her to hand it over they still got both of them on the charge. Hers was for aiding and abetting the handing over and even though her b/f didnt get caught they got him as well. The Feds knew they were selling drugs and wanted to make sure they got them good by adding a gun charge so they had the felon tell them he was robbed and he needed a new gun. If she didnt have the extra charge she would be out this year.

Firearm Enhancement is a way to make sure the bad guys dont walk the streets.

VW*Mike
03-11-2012, 5:45 PM
I think the sentencing laws in this country are severely flawed. Some crimes people get out of jail too quickly, even if the go to jail at all and then go right back through the revolving door. Multiple offenders need stiffer sentences on repeat visits. Others have made a single mistake at a young age and are haunted forever. Others still get the book thrown at them for a mistake, poor judgment, or just a plain outrages sentence.

I worked with a guy, who when he was younger, (I'm guessing late 70's early 80's) him and his street running friends knew EXACTLY what crimes to pull. They always picked easy small stuff, burglary, no gun, on the chance they were caught, it meant a short stay before being back out on the street.

I had a friend who went through a rough patch when we were out of high school. He took his grandfathers gun and car, went and robbed a liquor store, fled from the cops..... 21 years in prison. I have long forgotten what the break down is. While I do not agree with what he did, and feel that yes, he should go to prison, its not that black and white. He was sentenced to prison, for a crime he committed. However, being young, and not having any other trouble with the law I think 21 years was harsh. Getting locked up IMO for a few years would have the same effect as 20 odd years. A life is ruined, price that is paid is a high one. So, when he gets out, he will be a convicted felon around the age of 40, with no opportunities really to rebuild a normal life with a job, etc. What is he supposed to do? Use the tricks he learned from his fellow inmates when he gets out? I think a better service to the public is to try and rehabilitate young, first time offenders, and set reasonable sentences for crimes. Pot IMO and others, is FAR less dangerous then alcohol, yet is a Schedule 1 narcotic, worse then Schedule 2 Cocaine in the eyes of the law, not even mentioning the abuse of prescription drugs which are given out by your doctor and housewives wash down with wine before picking up their kids from school. /Rant.

Squid
03-11-2012, 5:57 PM
and who will make it work.

"drugs" is sorta like "sexual harassment" in that you are still guilty even if proven innocent or in my case DA admits a "mistake".

I'm pretty sure the whole Drugs&Guns enhancement was sold as something to combat gun toting drug dealers and smugglers, who typically "don't get high on their own supply".

I don't have too much of a problem with Gun Enhancements where the gun is used in a crime like robbery, because using a gun greatly increases chance an innocent person will be killed or injured (at least I assume so, could be presence of a gun makes victim so much less likely to fight back it reduces harm to victim? Now there is a pro-gun argument!). I think it should be less for using an unloaded or fake gun instead of real loaded gun. Or who knows, maybe not if that makes victims think they should 'chance it and call the bluff'.

Yeah, we got the two "snipers" and NRA all quick to equate drugs and lack of mental capacity, and NRA president Charlton Heston as an admitted alcoholic. Of course he ALWAYS kept the guns and booze totally separate, right?

taperxz
03-11-2012, 6:04 PM
NRA president Charlton Heston as an admitted alcoholic. Of course he ALWAYS kept the guns and booze totally separate, right?

drinking and shooting are not illegal FWIW

bwiese
03-11-2012, 10:32 PM
NRA president Charlton Heston as an admitted alcoholic. Of course he ALWAYS kept the guns and booze totally separate, right?


Context, sonny. Speak up when you know WTF you're talking about.

Right after that he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's onset. Alzheimer's presents a situation where the person doesn't know what's happening with brain decline and/or the person recognizes his life/sanity coming to a close.

radioman
03-11-2012, 11:09 PM
Calguns at night, last night someone posted he was smoking pot and cleaning his AR's, talk about out of the woodwork.

sfwdiy
03-11-2012, 11:16 PM
Calguns at night, last night someone posted he was smoking pot and cleaning his AR's, talk about out of the woodwork.

Midnight on Sunday. It's when ALL the best sh*t happens.

:rofl2:

--B

CCWFacts
03-11-2012, 11:20 PM
Someone correct me if I'm getting this wrong, but...

My understanding is that these firearm enhancements are real and can be very problematic for gun owners. A drug is illegal if you don't have a prescription for it. This can happen in some very innocent ways. Imagine: Wife has a prescription for Vicodin but didn't use it all and it remains (in a bottle with her name on it) in the medicine cabinet. Husband has a back ache and takes a pill with him on his way to work, in case the back ache gets too bad. Husband is CCWing and somehow has a law enforcement interaction and somehow gets searched (never consent to a search!!!) and the pill is found. "Do you have a prescription for this, sir?" Husband gives an innocent and honest answer (never answer questions that are not directly related to a traffic stop!) and says, "I have a back ache and my wife had some vicodin left over. Can I be on my way?" Suddenly a normal traffic matter has become a Federal felony. I'm not sure but I assume it's years of mandatory prison time.

Don't think it could happen? Some of the stories from the War on Drugs are so insane that you can't rule out almost anything as being too loony for a prosecutor to prosecute (http://reason.com/blog/2012/02/23/creepy-honey-traps-drug-cops-seduce-teen):

Last year in three high schools in Florida, several undercover police officers posed as students. The undercover cops went to classes, became Facebook friends and flirted with the other students. One 18-year-old honor student named Justin fell in love with an attractive 25-year-old undercover cop after spending weeks sharing stories about their lives, texting and flirting with each other.

One day she asked Justin if he smoked pot. Even though he didn't smoke marijuana, the love-struck teen promised to help find some for her. Every couple of days she would text him asking if he had the marijuana. Finally, Justin was able to get it to her. She tried to give him $25 for the marijuana and he said he didn't want the money -- he got it for her as a present.

There's no such thing as looking at the bigger picture, asking if it serves the interests of justice or society. It's about getting convictions.

So gun owners should be super-duper-careful about any drug-related things, and should also be careful about not consenting to searches or chit chatting with police about issues outside of basic facts of a traffic infraction.

Squid
03-11-2012, 11:34 PM
never ever say you have taken any medication what-so-ever, including stuff with no known 'impairing' effects and prescriptions.

Those get you a full blown DUI charge with all the trimmings same as being stinking drunk.

Remember in CA any level of impairment (as judged by officer) is good for a DUI.

No, they don't show any mercy for your current medical problem or illness.

To link this to a gun issue, I'll bring up the fact that a DUI then gives them right to search the vehicle to some extent, and pin anything found on you.

ODG23
03-12-2012, 12:53 AM
it shouldn't be too much of an argument for most. there isn't any good reason to have both together even if you happen to have both at all. if you want to play chicken with your rights then go ahead. hopefully cops don't see this as a green light to get their numbers up.

Squid
03-12-2012, 1:26 AM
semi-common and courts are already greased with lots of prior case law to accept any cops word that he found drugs near you as proof you "knowingly and willfully" had the illegal drugs in your possession.

Now link that up with a Govt that wants to get guns out of private hands, and the fact that the Govt has good data on where 90% of the guns they are after are located (figure 90% will be the home address of owner).


In the recent "Riders" trial in Oakland, CA and later fallout, it has become clear that not only were the 4 cops in question doing literally 100s, if not thousands, of drug plants on citizens, they were the central "training officers" who ran all new hires through their 'program' which included planting drugs on citizens as SOP.

After over a decade as Training Officers, and out of a PD of hundreds of officers, only one 2-week rookie spoke up and turned them in. Oh, and all the hundreds of Oakland PD who didn't do the right thing are all still on the force.

Lets also remember that police can use phony informants to finger anyone they want and get a search warrant.

So with current environment, the govt can use the Federal Drugs/Guns law to seize anyone's guns at anytime, and threaten them with 10 yrs in prison, pretty much just as easy as the cops can arrest you at anytime on a low-level 'throw away' charge like 'resisting arrest' or 'interfering'.

The difference is those don't have 10 years in prison as a possibility, and unlike "Possession" can't be argued to have been overreaching or exaggeration by the cops by you or your lawyer. If it is in your house, or your car, or your boat, or on your person, or in your purse(according to the cop) it is yours.

BigDogatPlay
03-12-2012, 12:57 PM
Federal sentencing guidelines add a mandatory minimum of 60 months (5 years) for use of a firearm as an instrumentality of a federal crime, or being in possession of a firearm while committing a federal crime. My recollection is that the 60 months is done up front and does not advance time to parole status on any other charges. I'm all in favor of that... use a gun, go to prison and stay there for a while. Hard for me to understand why that would be objectionable if all else is clean and above board.

FWIW, I worked for about 20 years and never once had to resort to planting anything on anyone. Nor did anyone I worked with in front of me. YMMV.

SilverTauron
03-12-2012, 1:40 PM
Thdrugs andose of you who have medical marijuana should take notice.Certain states have passed laws liberalizing the consumption of marijuana among otherwise law abiding citizens.I use the word "otherwise" because according to federal law drug use is illegal regardless of what the state authorizes.I would not bet my freedom on the concept that the Feds are ignoring the growth of state medical marijuana practices.Understand that the Federal Government takes a dim view of armed citizens as a whole,and the combination of guns and drugs under one roof makes quite the career enhancing bust for an ambitious LEO.

Remeber the saying *be careful who your friends are*.Having a pal over who "inhales" won't look good if the feds pay you a visit,as I rather doubt your protest that the drugs were not yours will work well in the event of an arrest.It would behoove all firearm owners to ensure their lady friends aren't MJ users in any respect for the same reason.

Meplat
03-13-2012, 7:04 AM
Federal sentencing guidelines add a mandatory minimum of 60 months (5 years) for use of a firearm as an instrumentality of a federal crime, or being in possession of a firearm while committing a federal crime. My recollection is that the 60 months is done up front and does not advance time to parole status on any other charges. I'm all in favor of that... use a gun, go to prison and stay there for a while. Hard for me to understand why that would be objectionable if all else is clean and above board.

FWIW, I worked for about 20 years and never once had to resort to planting anything on anyone. Nor did anyone I worked with in front of me. YMMV.

Big Dog:

Itís the while in ďpossession ofĒ part that is the problem. It turns gun people into a whole nother class of citizens. I have a LTC, and habitually do. So, now, if anything goes sideways in my life, even if it has nothing to do with my gun, I face a much stiffer sentence than my peers. For something that is legal, and just part of who and how I am. How is that different than having mandatory enhancements for people who have dark skin, or have gay pride symbols, or baby bottles, or Masonic rings, in their possession? It has nothing to do with the underlying case; itís just a way to Ďgetí those bastards we donít like.
Kind of like being a cop without the brass pass. Everyone is out to get you but you donít have the enhanced presumption of innocence.

Mike

Chris J
03-13-2012, 9:35 AM
This sounds like a good argument for ending the stupid war on drugs. Legalize them all, tax them, balance the budget.

Mesa Tactical
03-13-2012, 10:16 AM
This seems fully supported by mainstream gun rights groups like NRA who are pro-gun, but strictly anti-drug and anti-drug legalization.

I really hope the NRA doesn't have a position on drug legalization. That's not what we pay them for.

I use the word "otherwise" because according to federal law drug use is illegal regardless of what the state authorizes.

Another good question for the legal eagles of Calguns: if it once took an actual Constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, how the hell does the Federal government get away with outlawing other drugs?