After Buying Marijuana, Illinois Lieutenant Governor Becomes a Federally Prohibited Person

Marijuana Illinois attorney general juliana stratton

Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton purchases recreational marijuana at Sunnyside dispensary Wednesday, Jan. 1, 2020, in Chicago. (AP Photo/Paul Beaty)

Illinois passed a recreational marijuana legalization bill last year and on January 1, users could legally buy (heavily taxed) weed at a handful of locations around the state. Many locations reported long lines, but Illinois’ Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton used her VIP status to cut to the front of the queue and purchase some dope on New Years Day.

Our state’s lieutenant governor buying marijuana doesn’t exactly seem like the actions of a good role model. Then again, the purchase probably served as much as a photo op to burnish Stratton’s hard-left political reputation.

Leaving aside the jokes about the possible marijuana intoxication of many Land of Lincoln’s lawmakers given our state’s sad condition, her purchase has some implications for her personally.

After all, federal law still considers marijuana a Schedule I drug. And while weed legalization proponents are working to change that, current federal law still prohibits the use of cannabis, both recreationally and medicinally.

In Illinois, purchasers have their photo IDs scanned as part of marijuana purchases. Yes, the same Democrats who say that requiring government-issued photo IDs are too burdensome a requirement for voting are just fine mandating them to buy pot.

Those scans go to the State of Illinois and our state government shares them with the feds.

In other words, those buying now-legal pot in Illinois have effectively put themselves in the prohibited person category when it comes to gun ownership, at least where federal law is concerned.

While the Illinois State Police have said they will not revoke Firearms Owners ID cards from recreational or medical marijuana users, purchases will be denied when NICS background checks are conducted.

Furthermore, given recent crackdowns on who can own firearms, unless the feds change the law soon to decriminalize marijuana, it seems likely that someday Illinois may well use marijuana use as an excuse to crack down on users of weed, citing the federal prohibition.

Personally, I support marijuana legalization and don’t like the two-tiered system we have, nor the complications it creates for otherwise law-abiding gun owners.

Obviously Julia Stratton supports legalized pot, taking time on New Years Day to stock up.

CNN covered the “event” . . .

Despite the cold, snow and long lines, hundreds of Illinois residents — including the state’s lieutenant governor — waited outside to be among the first to buy weed following its legalization.

Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton was among hundreds of early morning customers at Sunnyside Dispensary, a Chicago marijuana dispensary, on the first day of legal recreational sales in the state, according to a release from Cresco Labs, which owns the dispensary.

“For too long, IL residents, particularly those that are black & brown, have been targeted and criminalized for #cannabis possession,” Stratton wrote in a tweet following her visit. “It’s not just a new year, it’s a new day. Thank you, @GovPritzker, for ending prohibition and building a more equitable Illinois.”

Stratton bought a 100-milligram tin of Mindy’s Edibles Glazed Clementine Orange Gummies, according to a statement from Joe Caltabiano, Cresco Labs president and co-founder. Each gummy is 5 milligrams, a “very popular microdose for beginning edible consumers,” he said.

And the lines in Illinois? They were very long in some locations. Exceptionally long:

 

So who is Julia Stratton?  On Twitter, she describes herself as:

Illinoisan. Wife. Proud mother of 4 daughters. Progressive. Triathlete. Justice advocate. Fan of live music. Lieutenant Governor of Illinois. she/hers

Here she is with multi-billionaire fat cat and now Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and most of their respective families.

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, left, and Lt. Governor Juliana Stratton. Via Twitter (Juliana Stratton)

So our Lieutenant Governor now can’t legally purchase a firearm as a newly-prohibited person. Maybe she can add “federally prohibited from purchasing guns” to her Twitter bio.

Frankly, it would have more relevance than her preferred pronouns.

comments

  1. avatar neiowa says:

    Book the quota baby

    1. avatar Dennis Carey says:

      I’ll bet she used her Gov debit card also so we just paid for that cunts fix.

      1. avatar Toni Smith says:

        C$%ts are useful and have warmth and depth…. She does not qualify 😛

      2. avatar Big Bill says:

        As I understand things (and I could be wrong; any corrections welcome), all transactions for “legal” sales of pot must be done in cash, as federal rules won’t let banks process credit/debit/check payments for pot dispensaries.

      3. avatar Jean-Claude says:

        Fix? Really?

        OK bro

  2. avatar Roger J says:

    I would be surprised to see the Feds get the information on IL buyers from the scanned drivers licenses. I doubt the IL Commodore computer can handle the data.

    1. avatar Xavier says:

      Silly comment, the feds and Illinois already share huge amounts of info, including taxable income if you declare items purchased abroad to custom agents.

      1. avatar Craig in IA says:

        “While the Illinois State Police have said they will not revoke Firearms Owners ID cards from recreational or medical marijuana users, purchases will be denied when NICS background checks are conducted.”

        The only info will be that which is put into the system by some human. Over the last 3 years we’ve had incidents of shooters who were not denied NICS requests merely because the gendarmes were either too lazy to enter the info or just flat out didn’t bother.

        1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

          After our Aurora shooting, thing changed here. They went to confiscate the guns of a deceased man because his FOID card expired. Maybe they should read the obit’s first. What if you bought a house from someone who’s card expired? Or, rented an apartment & the last tenant’s card expired. (Who fills out change-of-address card anymore?) Drug bust “mistakes” happen because of that.

    2. avatar H says:

      It’s a Radio Shack TRS-80. 🙂

      1. avatar Ragnar says:

        With a cassette drive?

  3. avatar GS650G says:

    The reasons and lists of prohibited persons is getting longer by the minute.

    Soon only the well connected and rich will be afforded the right to armed protection.

    As for weed legalization, see if it makes even the tiniest dent in drug crime in Chicago. The heavy taxes and required ID display will discourage many buyers. Besides, there are harder drugs than MJ that bring in more money.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      GS650G,

      The reasons and lists of prohibited persons is getting longer by the minute.

      That is the objective!

    2. “Soon the only the rich will be able to afford armed protection..”

      I believe like the New Roman Empire (Current USA.) I believe it would be sales by the Gauls ,(Patriots and Angry Freedom loving citizens), and burned to ash, along with it’s current political machinery….History can and will repeat itself……

      1. *Edit button* = Sacked….

    3. avatar Jean-Claude says:

      You are correct. The taxes are INSANE in Illinois on weed. Anyone who already has a “guy” is going to continue using their “guy”.

      People will use the weed stores to buy things their “guy” doesn’t get, like edibles and concentrates as an occasional treat, but the black market is still going to thrive.

  4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    If someone started dangerously stalking Straton, it would be off-the-charts comical if she attempted to purchase a firearm for self-defense and walked away empty-handed because NICS denied her purchase.

    And it would be incredibly entertaining watching her explain how she should be able to purchase a firearm anyway as a member of the ruling class in spite of failing NICS.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      To be clear, I am not claiming that it would be comical if Straton had a stalker. And I am not condoning that anyone stalk her. I am merely saying that it would be comical if the very laws which her political party supports work against her.

      1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

        We understand your humor. The left is the group that takes all sarcasm seriously. The left is the group that will arrest you for a harmless joke, (that everyone else got.) That’s why Jerry Seinfeld won’t perform at college campuses anymore.

    2. avatar Jablome says:

      You think it would be comical if this woman was being threatened by a dangerous stalker?!?! Talk about a reason to be on the prohibited persons’ list, you sicko!

      1. avatar Xavier says:

        Hey Jaba,

        Uncommon clearly stated his position in the follow up comment which was time stamped 16 minutes before your self righteous rant. Unless it takes you 16 minutes to write about 20 words, you read it, and commented regardless.

        Because in Leftisteville being “aggrieved” is like money.

        How dare you Jaba…stammers little Gretta.

        1. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          Bingo! The left always hears only what they want to hear.

        2. avatar GetTheJoke says:

          <—— The Joke ——–

          Unless you yourself are participating in some ultra-meta-tier trolling. In which case my hats off to you sir

      2. avatar James W Crawford says:

        As a father who had an imbecile judge give my marijunna bootlegging tenant a free pass for shooting a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with slugs at my son, I would be elated if some doper were to shoot this hypocritical bitch.

  5. avatar Dennis says:

    The fact that she’s an alleged law maker being more fuc*ed up than usual, doesnt bother me as much as using the opportunity to throw out that race card again! Pathetic!!!

    1. avatar Someone says:

      The race card is all she has. It’s the reason she got herself where she is today. For racist, everything is about race.

  6. avatar Dan W says:

    Dumb shits

  7. avatar former water walker says:

    Hilarious! LOTS of dumbazzes think the state of ILL won’t use yer pot use against you(as per FB). Some boyz are too stupid to be armed😅

  8. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Just another Leftard moron in a long line of them.

  9. avatar Dan says:

    Grow your own or just buy untaxed weed off the streets.

    1. avatar Marc says:

      Spot on. Untaxed… another word for the real free market

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      Agree. Why does the government deserve credit and profit from something anyone can grow in a sunny, well-drained spot in their yard?

      Yes, and I mean weed too, not just tobacco!

  10. avatar Xavier says:

    John Boch writes “Personally, I support marijuana legalization and don’t like the two-tiered system we have, nor the complications it creates for otherwise law-abiding gun owners.”

    Hey Boch,
    Keep your personal feelings out of the body of the story. If you still need to mention it, use the comments section.

    1. avatar John Boch says:

      I mention it because I don’t want someone to complain that I’m hiding my personal feelings on pot legalization.

      So it looks like I’m damned if I do and damned if I don’t.

      So I’ll just go with what feels right.

      Cheers.

      1. avatar Xavier says:

        “So I’ll just go with what feels”

        Feelz? No, no, we are not the left with what feelz good.

        For goodness sake, I even offered you an out, take comment number one, you know when the story will be published.

        It is wrong when the left does it (although they attempt it under subterfuge) and especially in this case we should lead by example.

        BTW 2A was wondering about Jasper county and the FOID.

      2. avatar Mike V says:

        Almost all TTAG articles include the authors bias, so what, never expected anything else.

        1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

          Agree. Everything here is news AND opinion. That’s why I’m here.

      3. Funny….Pot= good….Tobacco = very bad. Felony drug….soon… Cigarettes=very bad…see as above…. Additional Demo-nazi edicts: Soda= very bad….Banned….Salt= same…. Hamburger= bad….2nd amendment= Very, very, bad…No one should expect themselves at a government level….The long line of Libtard prohibition….

    2. avatar Red in CO says:

      Uhh… this is an editorial website, buddy. We get it, you don’t like freedom, calm down.

    3. avatar Someone says:

      Hey, Xavier, how much does Dan pay editors? Why don’t you give authors your imput before publication? Oh, you are not an editor? What makes you think your opinion is relevant in any way then?

  11. avatar George from Alaska says:

    And there it is.. “Especially those who are black and brown”… gotta get that bunch of shit verbiage in there. Never mind what actual crime stats say.

    1. avatar Dan W says:

      Reality is racist.

    2. Sounds racist to me….lol….

  12. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    This is not PC but that sounds like a woman who “thinks” she is being clever. Now let’s see ATF arrest her sometime.I need a good chuckle!

  13. avatar Billy says:

    Dennis, you are 100% correct. They NEVER miss a chance to use that RACE CARD.

  14. avatar matt says:

    if you must do drugs do them the old fashioned way illegally giving up your rights for a few hours of fun is the height of stupidity

  15. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Nixon’s 3 strikes and your out put people in jail as long as 20 years for stealing a $1 VCR tape. Now even the Neanderthal Republicans last week are admitting keeping people in jail for ridiculous non violent offenses is costing the States billions and billions more hiring more Police to chase after people addicted to drugs but cannot get off of them because skin flint greed monger Republicans will not fund drug rehabilitation programs to help them get off of drugs. Europe had been doing this for years and there drug problem is a fraction of what the U.S. of Hillbillies problems are.

    1. avatar Dan says:

      Nixon? Bill Clinton introduced the Three Strikes law in 1994.

      1. avatar Specialist38 says:

        Indication he’s a bot or under 25 years old.

      2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        Plus the $1 VCR tape haha. When movie stores were a thing in the 1970s and 80’s tapes would cost $75+, that would be about $175 today. There is a reason movie rental places were a thing. Vlad doesn’t have a clue.

        1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          Wrong it is you who know nothing. NPR did a complete program on people put in prison for 20 years under the 3 strikes and your out law and one of the people incarcerated was indeed put in jail for stealing a $1 dollar VCR tape. You would have known that if you watched news programs beside State Run News (Foxy News).

      3. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        ””””””””””””””””””Nixon? Bill Clinton introduced the Three Strikes law in 1994.””””””””””””’

        Yes you are correct. But Nixon started the ball rolling. Nixon launched a drug war that framed drug users not as alienated youths whose addiction was caused by inhabiting a fundamentally inequitable society, but as criminals attacking the moral fiber of the nation, people who deserved only incarceration and punishment.

        1. avatar Dan says:

          I did some research into your claims because admittedly I was not alive during that time and I see that Nixon did say some shady things regarding drugs and drug users. It seems though that policy wise he was just continuing previous administrations drug policies and did make some positive changes in regards to drug possession and treatment programs.
          “The Nixon Administration also repealed the federal 2–10-year mandatory minimum sentences for possession of marijuana and started federal demand reduction programs and drug-treatment programs.”

        2. avatar Dan says:

          The reason that he vilified marijuana users is so they could go after the hippie anti-war crowd and the reason they vilified heroin is so they could go after black people. Both pretty shitty things to do but as his policies went he was more lenient that some Democrats. I mean Bill Clinton would lock you up for 20 years for stealing a $1 VCR tape. Or so I’ve heard.

    2. avatar Someone says:

      In places where minimal price of stolen goods is set for theft to be prosecutable, criminals steal several times a day just enough to not reach the magical number. When caught, they laugh and go steal some more.

      Stealing is wrong and it is a crime. Crimes need to be punished. Repeated crimes need to be punished more harshly. It doesn’t matter how much the stolen thing costs. A theft is a theft. But trying to explain moral wrongness of stealing to socialist is like teaching a pig about cleanliness – it’s against his very nature.

      1. avatar Toni Smith says:

        that is because they are all for getting the government to steal from you to pay them. that way they dont have to do the hard dirty work

  16. avatar Dan says:

    Maybe that’s one of their goals with legalizing marijuana. To make the user a prohibited person who can’t own firearms. In essence more gun control.

    1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      Conspiracy!!!!!!! Tell me do you Right Wing guys go to school to become more stupid.

      1. avatar Xavier says:

        So Vladdie you are a left-wing gun owner?

        Which would mean you vote to take your own guns away?

        And you are calling Dan stupid?

        Answer any of those questions, but I warn you, your head could explode.

        1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          The Brady Bill has been on the books for years and took no ones guns away. Extending it to cover all gun purchases is long overdue.

          Safe Storage takes no ones guns away but would save many children’s lives. In case you were not aware of it 1,300 kids lost their lives and 3 times that many were crippled for life last year because we do not prosecute morons for not locking up deadly weapons.

          And to answer you question we have over 1,000 members in our gun club and the majority of them are Democrats. Yes you read that right Democrats. Something that is too far above the heads of the Far Right to even fathom.

        2. avatar Xavier says:

          You are correct Vladdie,

          People on the right can not “fathom” how so many on the left suffer from cognitive dissonance, you know Vladdie holding two opposing view points…. simultaneously.

          To which you did not answer my question, rather you told me about the Brady Bill, which you admit is decades old.

          Nearly every CURRENT Dem presidential candidate has mentioned or supported a ban on the largest segment of firearms, semi-automatic, which accounts for approximately 85 plus percent of firearms sold. Other Dems and Leftist have called for far more, including abolishing the 2nd amendment.

          So Vladdie, for the second time, do you vote to take your own guns away?

          If you do, you owe Dan an apology.

        3. avatar J G says:

          Sadly, Vlad ignores the real goals of the Democrat party in terms of gun control (aka confiscation). Liberals like social justice because it feels good to them. It is a self-righteous motivation to feel good about doing something supposedly good for others. In the case of Vlad, that appears to outweigh the cold hard facts that the platform of the national party (which is the direction it will go if allowed to gain more power) is total confiscation unless you are one of the elites.

      2. avatar Dan says:

        You actually calling other people stupid with all the dumb shit we’ve all seen you say? And I’m not even a right winger. I actually lean more left but our rights mean more to me than any political affiliation.

        1. avatar guy says:

          Dan said our rights mean more to me than any political association. Dan I would like to shake your hand if I could.

        2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          Dan saying that a Federal Law that has been on the books for decades in regards to marijuana use is a conspiracy is a bit far fetched to claim its a conspiracy to keep guns out of the hands of people who use it now that its legal in some states. Everyone knows that once the Feds have a gun law or ruling it almost takes a movement of heaven to get them to cancel that law.

        3. avatar Dan says:

          The Federal Law has been on the books for decades but people buying marijuana from state approved dispensaries who then pass that information along to the Feds is a new thing that we don’t know the long term effects of. How will that information be used? Furthermore, I’m reasonably sure that the highly educated liberal geniuses who also want gun control know that marijuana usage prohibits a person from buying a firearm. You know, because they’re so smart and all.

    2. avatar Xavier says:

      Or to make people dumber and more compliant

      1. avatar Shire-man says:

        No reason it can’t be both. They get to drug the population and revoke their rights all at the same time. Oh, and tax. Really, legalization is a totalitarians dream.

        Now if they actually cared about increasing personal liberty, reducing criminal costs and ending prohibition they’d be consistent and get that question off the 4473 but they won’t.

        Here slave, smoke this. Feel better? I knew you would.

        1. avatar guy says:

          You nailed it!

  17. avatar JP Ruiz says:

    The question that needs to be answered is this:

    “If the Federal Government fully legalizes marijuana, does it still prohibit someone from owning a firearm”?

    1. avatar Red in CO says:

      Sure, why not? Internal consistency is for the little people and fedzilla routinely breaks its own rules anyway

  18. avatar MB says:

    I would guess she was a prohibited person a long time ago, she just made it a matter of public record.

    1. avatar Toni Smith says:

      IHMO being a prohibited person should disqualify you from running for any govt office.

      1. avatar Dan W says:

        If you can’t be trusted with a gun you really can’t be trusted with political power.

  19. avatar Redfox says:

    The comments! 😂

  20. avatar Retired law enforcement officer says:

    Users of marijuana will increase traffic fatalities. The state of Illinois receives millions in taxes. How much is one of your family members worth? Driving while under the influence of marijuana appears to be uninforcible at this time. Pritzker is the head of a drug cartel. Criminal possession of marijuana became recreational marijuana just like illegal gambling became gaming. Research states where marijuana has been legal for some time.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “Driving while under the influence of marijuana appears to be uninforcible at this time.”

      You should probably take the advice you give in your last line.

      It’s entirely enforceable. Colorado does it all the time. In fact, they’re probably overzealous about it, nailing people who aren’t high because it takes days for the metabolites of THC to clear a person’s system so there’s really no way to tell if they were high at the time or not.

      Well, there kind of is, but no one’s going to bother to pay for it when they can say “you tested positive”, charge you with DUI and you’re guilty just by virtue of being accused, which is exactly what Colorado does with DUI. Why? For all da moneies. They run ads here bragging about taking people here down for DUI in such a manner that the person goes from productive tax paying citizens to being on welfare. ‘Cause, ya know, that’s a great public policy. Especially for a crime that usually harmed no one and which the state doesn’t actually bother to prove you’ve committed.

      1. avatar Retired law enforcement says:

        I’m talking about enforcible in Illinois. A blood alcohol level of .08% or above is considered intoxicated in Illinois. No standard exists for marijuana in Illinois last time I checked. A prosecution would be extremely difficult for the very reasons you explained. A doper high on marijuana can kill an entire family and traffic citations would be the most a prosecutor could charge. I don’t know what happens in Colorado.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          See Illinois Statutes Chapter 625. Vehicles §-501.

          (a) A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any vehicle within this State while:

          (3) under the influence of any intoxicating compound or combination of intoxicating compounds to a degree that renders the person incapable of driving safely;

          (4) under the influence of any other drug or combination of drugs to a degree that renders the person incapable of safely driving;

          (b) The fact that any person charged with violating this Section is or has been legally entitled to use alcohol, cannabis under the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act, other drug or drugs, or intoxicating compound or compounds, or any combination thereof, shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this Section.

          From the Illinois SecState:

          “A driver may not operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of cannabis prescribed for medicinal purposes and may not transport medicinal cannabis in a vehicle unless it is stored in a tamper-evident container and kept in an area that is inaccessible while the vehicle is in motion.”

          According to the Law Offices of Andrew Nickle, a DUI attorney in Yorkville, IL:

          “Any person with a THC level of 5 nanograms or more per milliliter of whole blood or 10 nanograms or more per milliliter of other bodily substances may be charged with DUI.”

  21. avatar Robert Messmer says:

    The Lt Governor used her black, female privilege to cut the line. Great show of equality.

  22. avatar Ogre says:

    Unless the Federal Government changes cannabis’ status fast, it looks like the two-tiered system for recreational/medicinal marijuana will remain in place in states that legalize drugs: The legal storefront operations (for those who don’t care if they become “prohibited persons” on the federal list) and the good old dealer on the street corner (for those who don’t want to be recorded as marijuana purchasers and become “prohibited persons” for that reason).

    When government makes an activity prohibited (e.g., drugs or (maybe) guns or prostitution, and formerly booze), the net effect is that people will take risks and pay more to get it on the local black market. Organized crime flourishes. If government were to legalize such prohibited things, it would reduce a lot of problems. Government could benefit, too, by regulating or at least taxing formerly verboten activities. Of course, there would still be those amongst us who would not agree and would seek illegal alternatives (untaxed moonshine, for example), and there would be elements of society who would object on religious or moral grounds. But I look at it the same way as guns. If you don’t like them, nobody’s forcing you to buy one. But don’t tell me that I can’t. Live and let live.

  23. avatar Cknarf says:

    You’re no longer an unlawful user on a state level, but federally, you’re a filthy, filthy, criminal.

    I’m so confused.

  24. avatar 2asuxsucks says:

    John do you have any updates on the Jasper county sheriff and
    Foid card mess

    1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

      I’m wondering that, too.

  25. avatar mike says:

    If you are not legally allowed to buy a firearm but you can still serve in Government!!!!

    Many jobs require drug testing and criminal background checks, except Politician.

    Lets make it a requirement that ALL politicians are drug tested and reveal their criminal convixtion.

  26. I don’t think the scans of the buyers ID’s are forwarded directly to the state. Yes ID’s are scanned. Yes dispenseries may retain records with the buyers permission. But there is no automatic mechanism for those buyer records to be sent directly to the state.

    1. avatar Firing pin says:

      You Hope!

  27. avatar shadling says:

    No drug tests for IL state employees?

  28. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

    “While the Illinois State Police have said they will not revoke Firearms Owners ID cards from recreational or medical marijuana users, purchases will be denied when NICS background checks are conducted.”

    Existing cards won’t be ‘seized’, but when it comes time to renew your card, don’t they consult NICS?

    And then just conveniently decline to renew your card?

  29. avatar strych9 says:

    “Our state’s lieutenant governor buying marijuana doesn’t exactly seem like the actions of a good role model.”

    Damn straight. Stop at the liquor store for your intoxicants. For the fucking children!

    The whole thing is horseshit. Not the least of the problems is the question of how long is she a “user” for? If she stops smoking pot how long before her rights are magically rights again? A month? Year? Decade? Never?

    Drug laws and the people that support them are dumb.

    1. avatar Red in CO says:

      Yep! Thankfully the new generation of Republicans, like you (from some of your posts I get the impression you’re on the younger side) and me, are FAR more libertarian leaning than previous generations. We see how stupid it is to be against guns and for drugs, or vice versus, given that the arguments for or against the prohibition of either are identical

  30. avatar Xaun Loc says:

    Hey, Vlad, could you explain exactly how so-called “Safe Storage” would save so many “children’s” lives when the majority of the “children” you counted are teenage gang members killed in gang-on-gang violence, mostly in Democrat-controlled urban areas that already have those laws and more.

    Or perhaps you would explain how “universal background checks” would apply to criminals selling guns to other criminals.

    Of course when you just make up numbers as you go along (like your make-believer “Gun Club”) it is easier to have “statistics” to “prove” whatever nonsense you babble.

  31. avatar Dude says:

    “For too long, IL residents, particularly those that are black & brown, have been targeted and criminalized for #cannabis possession,”

    So that’s why they’re doing this. It has nothing to do with money, right? Right?

    1. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

      They also want to change the law that charges accomplices with murder, if anyone gets killed during a crime. Why? Because CC people are shooting back. They used to shoot you and run off. No one knew who they were. Now, one dead criminal, and you know who all his friends are. Too many friends of bad guys getting charged with murder. The politicians don’t want that. Depletes their pool of voters.

  32. avatar Dude says:

    Government: “We must ban fruit and candy flavored e-cigs because the kids like them.”

    Also Government: “Here, have some pot infused Orange Gummies.”

  33. avatar Matt says:

    I thought for sure I read an article that specifically said IL wouldn’t share this data with the feds? I don’t trust them but at least they said it. Am I wrong? Seems like this article should mention that.

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      You’re wrong. Or naive. Or sadly both…

  34. They want as many people to be high as possible. They hope people won’t think about the high taxes, bad weather, and all the issues with the Illinois government enough to put together a plan to move out of the state. I will bet the weed taxes will be spent on things it shouldn’t be – and the state will still be in hole financially.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Weed taxes are no different from any other taxes, which means of course it won’t be spent responsibly. Another reason for the “legalization” that shouldn’t be ignored (but it is) is the heavy lobbying effort by Big Cannabis. This is how laws get passed. You have to grease the right palms. Then the pols pretend they’re only doing it for some SJW cause.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Danial Craig’s character in The Layer Cake got this right at the beginning of the movie back in 2004.

        If you like Noir it’s a fucking great movie too.

        1. avatar Someone says:

          Only Noir I like is Colion.

      2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Pot Heads have never been Pro Liberty. But they are pro high taxes. So much so that they drove the pot business, out of business in California. Many pot companies moved to low tax Colorado. And they brought their anti gun thinking with. They supported legalizing weed and gun control at the same time.
        And that’s what happened in Colorado, Washington State and California.

        The Billionaire pot heads will never support gun rights with their $$$$. Because they are socialist progressive in their political orientation.

  35. avatar Goober says:

    Fake News

  36. avatar Alan says:

    Think the lady might get the benefit of “special consideration” from state officialdom?

  37. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    O wonder if she has a FOID card. If not, it’s not an issue here. I wouldn’t care if she smokes anything.

  38. avatar Smokes weed says:

    Actually the law is if you’re addicted or a habitual user…so if you don’t have a medical card you’re good

    1. avatar Jerms says:

      Not making excuses for anyone but buying it doesnt necessarily mean youre going to use it

      1. avatar Smokes weed says:

        You’re right. I smoke it and still buy my firearms.

        1. avatar WI Patriot says:

          And that, makes you a felon…

        2. avatar Toni Smith says:

          Personally WI Patriot if he or anyone else is not harming anyone else with their habit and they are being responsible and not being a dick with driving or firearms etc. then it should not be a felony in the first place. Under Common Law for there to be a Crime there Must be a Victim and the perpetrator and victim cant be the same damn person. Any law that makes criminal an act for which there is no victim should not and lawfully is not a crime

    2. avatar WI Patriot says:

      Actually, you’re wrong…
      Question 11e…
      “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? 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.”

      1. avatar Smokes weed says:

        Just say no as it has to be documented, they can’t track usage unless they are going to perform drug test and the checkouts. Also, majority of cops are felons, by your logic cuz I know some that still use marijuana. But fuck it I’ll be an undocumented felon…we all are to some extent.

  39. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I’ve said it before. Pot heads are Socialist Progressive in their political orientation. They will trade guns for pot every single time. Pot Heads elected to office have no interest in changing the law.
    They have always been anti-civil rights.

  40. avatar WI Patriot says:

    ROFLMFAO…caught in their own little “Catch-22″…

  41. avatar Illinoistrulyblows says:

    This state is the sh!thole 45 was referring to. Wow.

  42. avatar VerendusAudeo says:

    I love how you use the term ‘multi-billionaire fat cat’ pejoratively here when it applies to a ‘liberal’, but also happily slurp on Trump’s nuts at any given opportunity.

  43. avatar Mrs. Lead says:

    So all those IDs are going into the system right?

    Wonder how many state or federally supported people are spending their cash on drugs? I would like to see the list. If they have money for recreational purposes then they do not need any assistance.

  44. If I remember correctly… Aren’t there “laws on the books” in most states and Federal level that prohibit politicians in office from drug use…And that it would make them ineligible for them to maintain their government position if engaged in such activity….?!

  45. avatar mac says:

    Her real pronouns are not she/hers. They really are these: BAMF/HHIC. (Translated from Prison Ebonics that’s Bad *ss Mutha F**kah/ Head Ho In Charge.
    Also, she can consume all the weed she wants; she has armed state police officers protecting her around the clock with firearms. Lt. Governor Stratton asks: “Doesn’t everyone?”

    1. avatar Jake says:

      I like BNIC better myself

  46. avatar Will Drider says:

    Thats small potatoes. There’s nothing stating she is a gun owner or plans to buy a gun. On the other hand Nikki Fried, Florida Commissioner of Agriculture (that handles all CC Licences for the State) and Commerce: has publically flaunted her Fl CCL and her Medical Marijuana Card. Since she “publically released” information on both to the there is no expectation of privacy nor medical information protections (HIPA). Clearly she has violated Federal Law especially since ATF has provided further clarification regarding medical marijuana being a disqualification from firearm ownership. WHY does ATF ignore her blatant, defiant and UNLAWFUL CONDUCT? Takes about 15 seconds to find her quoted self incrimination in press accounts. DOJ/BATFE: is anybody home? Maybe her Crime is ignored because she is a gun grabber who wants to trash the U.S. and Florida Constitutional Rights and is using her position to support a FL AWB!

    Her/her Office’s position on issuing/renewing Fl CCL is that “thsir system” does not access nor have authority to screen medical information.

  47. avatar Keith says:

    Will dispensaries store my information when I give them my ID to purchase marijuana?
    Dispensaries will be required to use electronic readers to scan and verify the validity of the consumer’s government-issued identification, which must prove the consumer is at least 21 years old. State law prohibits the information on the identification from being retained, used, shared, or disclosed.

    So think of showing your ID at the door like you do when entering a bar. The location takes an image of your driver’s license for their own protection, to make sure they carded you.

    Showing your ID at Point of Sale is to:

    1. Confirm whether you are a resident or non-resident to determine how much you can purchase. You may be asked if you want to enter their database, which is for future promotional marketing. Like when you buy something at J. Crew and they ask for your email address.

  48. avatar Keith says:

    Will the purchase, possession, and/or consumption of cannabis affect an Illinois resident’s rights to own a firearm, or his or her FOID card status? 

    Illinois State Police say they “will not revoke Firearm’s Owner’s Identification Cards based solely on a person’s legal use of adult use cannabis.”

    “Pursuant to both State and Federal law, a person who is addicted to or a habitual user of narcotics is not permitted to possess or use firearms,” the department said in a statement. “Accordingly, the ISP will revoke FOID cards where it is demonstrated that an individual is addicted to or is a habitual user of cannabis. The ISP would also revoke or deny the FOID cards of those who violate certain provisions of the Cannabis Regulation and Tax 

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email