The current revision of the 4473 helps clarify things. See question 11e on the
4473 (emphasis in original):
...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.....
zxcvbob said:
I think y'all are conflating 4473 form to *purchase* a gun from a FFL with possessing a gun that you already own. Then the license to carry is a third thing altogether.....
I don't see how you could possibly believe that after all our past discussions on the subject.
Federal law prohibits a marijuana user, even if legal under state law, from having a gun in his possession. "Possession" includes having the gun in his hands. So if you use marijuana you can't, under federal law, own a gun, rent a gun, borrow a gun, shoot a gun, fondle a gun at a gun store or gun show, etc.
P5 Guy said:
...I see conflicts on the horizon.
The Oregon Supreme Court dealt with that under Oregon law some years ago.
The Oregon Supreme Court, in
Willis v. Winters, 253 P.3d 1058 (Or., 2011), ruled that Michael Winters, as Sheriff of Jackson County, was required
under Oregon law to issue a concealed handgun license to Cynthia Willis even though she was a medical marijuana user. The Court concluded that Ms. Willis had satisfied the statutory requirements under Oregon's "shall issue" conceal handgun license (CHL) law, notwithstanding that the use of marijuana violated federal law. So the Oregon sheriff was obliged under the applicable Oregon statute to issue a CHL to Ms. Willis.
The case did not substantively address the federal law issue. In fact, the Oregon Supreme Court specifically noted (at pp. 1065 - 1066, emphasis added):
...Neither is the statute [the Oregon CHL law] an obstacle to Congress's purposes in the sense that it interferes with the ability of the federal government to enforce the policy that the Gun Control Act expresses. A marijuana user's possession of a CHL may exempt him or her from prosecution or arrest under ORS 166.250(1)(a) and (b), but it does not in any way preclude full enforcement of the federal law by federal law enforcement officials...
And thus the Oregon Supreme Court specifically acknowledged that while Ms. Willis would not be arrested by Oregon LEOs or prosecuted under Oregon law for carrying a concealed handgun, she could still be arrested by federal LEOs, prosecuted under federal law and sent to federal prison for being a prohibited person in possession of a gun in violation of 18 USC 922(g)(3).