Comm2A Wins Second ‘Pot’ Case in Federal Court

Marijuana and Guns
Marijuana and Guns
Commonwealth Second Amendment (Comm2A)
Commonwealth Second Amendment (Comm2A)

Natick, MA -( On Friday, September 11th, a federal court in Boston ruled that the Second Amendment rights of plaintiff Steve Richmond were infringed when he was denied a license to carry by Hingham Police Chief Michael Peraino due to a 40 year old conviction for possession of marijuana.

In denying Richmond's license application, Chief Peraino relied upon a state law that bars anyone convicted of “any law regulating the use, possession or sale of a controlled substance” from obtaining a license to possess, purchase, or carry firearms.

In his nine page decision, Judge Leo T. Sorokin ordered Chief Peraino to “give prompt consideration” to any application by Richmond and enjoined the chief from applying the challenged statute as a basis for denying Richmond a license.

This case is virtually identical to a 2013 case (Wesson v. Fowler) brought by Comm2A on behalf of two individual plaintiffs against the towns of Salisbury and Natick. However, despite a similar ruling in Wesson, Massachusetts police chiefs continued their unconstitutional application of the law.

You can read the court's order HERE.

Comm2A will be reviewing the cases of other, similarly situated individuals and will continue to take legal action until the Commonwealth and individual police chiefs halt this form of unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment.

About Commonwealth Second Amendment (Comm2A):

Commonwealth Second Amendment is a Massachusetts based 501(c)(3) non-profit dedicated to preserving and expanding the rights of gun owners in the northeast. Comm2A is dedicated to promoting a better understanding of rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. In addition to legal action projects the organization’s activities include educational programs designed to promote a better understanding of Massachusetts and Federal firearms laws and rights as well as programs to defend and protect the civil rights of Massachusetts gun owners.

For more information, visit:

  • 13 thoughts on “Comm2A Wins Second ‘Pot’ Case in Federal Court

    1. Like no can just make a mistake anymore, everything is negligence. In that case you all are negligent because there isn’t a day that goes by I don’t make a mistake that was preventable. If you never make a mistake you never produce anything and are drag on our society. Get a job, be productive, you will see how many mistakes you make.

    2. In the last decade, nationwide, there has been exactly ONE documented case of a true “accidental” discharge of a firearm. It occurred at an outdoor range, and involved an old, worthless pot-metal Chinese AK-47 “knockoff.”

      The rifle discharged when the user attempted to activate the safety (move the lever to the “on” position), but the manual safety snapped in half. Luckily, the weapon was pointed safely downrange, and no injuries resulted.

      Modern firearms, especially from major manufacturers, simply DO NOT suffer such “accidental” discharges.

      1. The difference between an accidental and a negligent discharge is simple. An accident can happen when a part breaks or is worn past acceptable tolerances or a manufacturing defect. See Remington’s recall of one of there shotguns. Aside from a part malfunction ANY discharge not pointed at the desired target is negligent.

    3. Worth noting that BATF has declared that having a medical marijuana card in states where it has been decriminalized is considered grounds for refusal of a gun purchase. BATF says that even if pot is legal in your state, anyone who uses it – or is authorized to use it – in accordance with state law, is still a “user of an illegal controlled substance,” and therefore a “prohibited person.”
      I have seen no successful legal challenges to this position.
      Under the BATF interpretation, it is a felony for anyone with a medical marijuana card, or a recreational marijuana user in those states where it is legal, to be in possession of, or have access to any firearm or ammunition.
      Jeff Knox

    4. The important part is that the second amendment is slowly regaining its strength and stature as a constitutional right, not subject to usurpation over minor discrepancies.

    5. No such thing as an accidental discharge (AD). It is always the user’s fault. “The gun just went off” argument is invalid. Hence, negligent discharge (ND)

      1. I have to disagree. Their are rare instances where a weapon malfunction, or another unforeseen circumstance can cause a discharge. For example, a firearm could discharge due to manufacturing defect. That discharge is not the result of any negligence, and should not be classified as such.

        Negligent Discharge – a discharge of a person’s firearm, whether intentional or not, that was primarily caused by the person’s failure to follow established safety procedures or legal justifications for deadly force.

        Accidental Discharge – an unintentional discharge of an person’s firearm that was not caused by any negligence or failure to follow established safety procedures.
        (source: Negligent v. Accidental Discharge BY AARON – BLUE SHEEPDOG

      1. If you’re ‘high’ and handling guns it’s no accident. It’s negligence especially in states where marijuana, contrary to Federal law, has been ‘legalized. In states where marijuana is legal you can expect their legislatures to find more ways to blame the guns for whatever happens. That’s what Liberals do best.

      2. ND=Negligent Discharge. We very seldom use Accidental Discharge anymore simply because when these discharges occur they, almost invariably, are caused by a negligent action of the operator, not a true accident.

    6. Can you see the trap being set? Person high on ‘pot’ commits a gun crime or has a ND resulting in death or serious injury and politicians and media types call for even more ‘gun control laws’. LOL

    Comments are closed.