Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Firearm Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor says Maryland should protect firearm rights of certified medical cannabis patients
Summary
House Bill 336 would reconcile state public-safety and health statutes so Marylanders who hold medical cannabis certifications are not automatically disqualified from purchasing firearms under state forms; supporters argued the federal-state interplay requires clarification, while a legal expert warned of federal felony risk.
Delegate Robin Grammer told the Judiciary Committee that House Bill 336 would reconcile the public safety and health statutes so Maryland residents who are certified medical cannabis patients would not automatically lose the right to purchase firearms under state forms.
Supporters included veterans and representatives of veterans groups who said veterans use medical cannabis for pain management and feared losing constitutional firearm rights if they obtained a State medical cannabis certificate. The Office of the Public Defender also testified in favor, calling the bill a step toward preventing people from having to choose between medication and firearms ownership.
Mark Penick, a former federal prosecutor, testified as an information witness and warned the committee that federal law still classifies marijuana as a prohibited substance and that federal forms (ATF Form 4473) ask whether an applicant uses marijuana; federal law makes possession of a firearm by any cannabis user a federal felony. Penick said state changes cannot alter federal criminal exposure.
Sponsors cited an opinion by the Maryland Attorney General (Brian Frosh) recommending reconciliation between health and public safety articles to avoid administrative conflicts, and said prior committee actions had left the question unresolved. Witnesses urged the committee to protect veterans and medical patients while noting the federal-state legal risks raised by other witnesses.
The committee heard questions about prior legislative history and the interaction between state permitting processes and federal law; no formal committee vote was recorded in the transcript.
