Denied Gun Purchase

[sonnyb80]

He does have some sort of dyslexia issue, so its a good chance he marked yes to that question.

[keenkeen]

He does have some sort of dyslexia issue, so its a good chance he marked yes to that question.

Yep, dyslexia for sure...plus he had just smoked a phat blunt in the parking lot.

[WartHog]

REEFER MADNESS!!!

Sent from my Nokia Lumia 520 with Tapatalk

[9kracing]

I can confirm that past minor marijuana convictions, or having had a cannabis card, does not preclude you from owning guns unless you answer Y to "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance"

[The Gleam]

Like the SSN, that information doesn't go to the DOJ. The dealer will terminate the transfer if the person answers YES to that question however

Correct. That is, if the dealer caught it at the time of also running the DROS. A subsequent review leading to cancellation due to one of these answers being caught at a later time would then cancel the DROS. I agree, it would be rare the dealer would not catch it, but I was trying to address all possible scenarios.

Also, while DOJ/BOF would have no access to med-records or even know that the buyer had a Marijuana card, people like LA City Attorney Mike Feuer have been regulating marijuana dispensaries to the point of trying to shut them down; is it possible DOJ/BOF is accessing records of these dispensaries to review lists of buyers? That would not be prohibited as it's not subject to HIPAA privacy laws. I'm not saying this is being done - but is it?

In any case, from what the OP has stated about the buyer once having a skeleton in his past come up about drug use, it's a likely bet that it stems from that and his friend is not sure of the legal documentation with governing bodies and the consequences that may have surrounded that discovery at the time, now following him later in life.

It seems there is more to be discovered about that incident, than anything else, as being the reason for his current DROS denial.

"This will go down on your permanent record!!" - (and it did.)

[bsg]

i believe there is more to the story than your friend has told you.

[ChrisC]

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Funny how so many are ok with him not being able to own a firearm because of marijuana use. Your a hypocrite if you think it is ok to not allow him that right which is suppose to be not infringed upon!

[TeddyBallgame]

Marinol is not a "form of cannibis" anymore than polyester would be considered a "form of cotton".

Ask me how I know

http://www.drugs.com/marinol.html

What is Marinol?

Marinol (dronabinol) is a man-made form of cannabis (also known as marijuana).

Marinol is used to treat loss of appetite that causes weight loss in people with AIDS. It is also used to treat severe nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. Marinol is for use only when other medications have been unable to control the nausea and vomiting.

[keenkeen]

http://www.drugs.com/marinol.html

Let me try again:

Is a cubic zirconia a "form of a diamond" or a synthetic substitute?

Hint: Ask your wife on this one.

[keenkeen]

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Funny how so many are ok with him not being able to own a firearm because of marijuana use. Your a hypocrite if you think it is ok to not allow him that right which is suppose to be not infringed upon!

We keep all kinds of criminals from owing guns.

[RickD427]

ok, even if that is true it still leads into why DOJ would suddenly be requesting this guys medical records, that doesn't seem like the norm, unless there was some other type of red flag to warrant further investigating

sh** if they ever get a look at my medical records they'll wonder if im even still alive

Teddy,

I doubt that DOJ ever tried to access the OP's medical records. HIPAA does allow law enforcement access to medical records under some circumstances. The exceptions that I'm most familiar with allow us access to patient records for mandated reporting, emergency management, fugitive tracking, and for court (please refer to 45 CFR 164.512).

These HIPAA exceptions became a major issue for my agency following the Glendale Metrolink train crash. We had problems securing information from a hospital on an emergency basis that was needed to identify victims. The after-action review showed that medical staff did not have an adequate knowledge of the law and failed to comply because of that lack of knowledge.

I don't know of a HIPAA exception that would allow access for NICS or DROS checks unless there was an authorizing statute, or a criminal case being filed.

It's much more likely that authorities became aware of the marijuana issue through the issuance of a marijuana ID card, or by a marijuana-related criminal history.

[idntwn2]

Let me try again:

Is a cubic zirconia a "form of a diamond" or a synthetic substitute?

Hint: Ask your wife on this one.

No, but diamonds CAN be man-made and they are in fact diamonds by any definition. As in the case of Marinol being a THC analog. My late BIL used it to stimulate his appetite when he was diagnosed with ALS. RIP may he. (Y'all never want to have to go through the nightmare that is ALS) It made him nearly commatose. Potent stuff as I am to understand it.

The DEA has classified THC and it's neighbors as controlled substances and their unsupervised usage, possession etc, are illegal under federal law despite what state and local governments may claim to the contrary. Since gun sales are a federally regulated matter, I suspect that the problem may be found there.

IANAL FYI

[RickD427]

HIPAA does make your records confidential, and penalizes for breeches of that confedentiality. Law enforcement does not get any special access to your records because they're law enforcement. They would be denied access to your records without a subpoena or your signature on a filled out HIPAA compliant authorization form, however this depends on the person validating the request and handles the releasing of information of said medical facility, and if a breech occurred the facility can be fined up to 25,000 and employee 2500, you can also litigate for damages or losses.

Sir,

You're dead wrong about HIPAA records being "Confidential". They're only protected against disclosure. There's a big difference between these two things. Where information is "Confidential" any disclosure of the information is prohibited. A good example is a military "Confidential" document. If someone like Bradley Manning gives that document to the bum on the streetcorner, Bradley has committed a crime and he gets to go to jail. If the bum gives that "Confidential" document to someone else, then the bum has committed a crime for which he can go to jail (there is a "knowing" element to the offense - that's why such documents are marked in really big letters).

On the other hand, medical records are not "Confidential", they're only protected against disclosure. Let's look at the same example. If Bradley Manning is working as a health care provider, and he schemes to obtain a patient record, then he's committed a crime and he gets to go to jail (5 years). He also can get a $100K fine. Now he gives the medical record to the same bum, and the bum gives the records to someone else. In this case, only Manning gets to go to jail. There is nothing to charge the bum with.

If you really believe that HIPAA protected information is "Confidential" then please tell me what we could charge the bum with, or what type of fine the bum would be liable to.

If the information is "Confidential" and it "get's out of the bag", there are tools available to put it back "in the bag."

If the information is only protected against disclosure and it "get's out of the bag", then it's out of the bag for good.

That's the big difference.

As an LEO, there are several instances where I can access HIPAA protected information without need of a warrant. The primary ones are to complete mandated reporting, the gain information helpful in the tracking of fugitives, emergency management, and for court. You can find the full list of law enforcement exceptions in 45 CFR 164.512.

[onelonehorseman]

Yep, dyslexia for sure...plus he had just smoked a phat blunt in the parking lot.

LOL

[Condorguns]

Maybe he was one of those people who wanted to use their pot card as a 2nd form of ID? I don't know if it's actually ever happened(I've heard rumors, but never seen it in a shop or heard any employees discussing it), but it's been asked about before.

It's happened twice in my shop.

If you do that you have to deny the sale.

Don't show your card please, don't talk about your card please.