Would you trade your guns for dope

[Bennettjh]

An article about Illinois and the 2A, usually equals...

 

[printcraft]

Someone would have to be high to trade their guns for dope.
















Wait................

 

[46201]

No, I would not. I don't drink, don't smoke and don't do drugs.
But I would give up my 2A rights for 2 billion dollars and a Big Mac.
I would then hire a 24hr security detail and would not need guns outside of my home.

You wouldnt make it past day 1. Your security detail would know you were unarmed and rob you of your $2 billion...And maybe even your big mac.

 

[Fletch]

Not saying I would or wouldn't... would prefer not to, but if I'm riding the cancer train and chemo/radiation/whatever is kicking my ass? I'd certainly give it some thought.

 

[nakinate]

so i guess themost common ingo alternate example would be bacon....WOULD ANYONE GIVE UP THEIR GUNS FOR BACON.....i still say no

What about bacon with cocaine on it?

 

[Mark 1911]

No.

The government is not my big brother.

 

[ashby koss]

By nature of the meaning of "RIGHTS" I would say they need to change this all so that you can partake in any state legalized activity and still maintain your rights, all of them. What if you get arrested due to a passenger who happens to be holding without you knowing, are you then targeted to lose your 2nd amendment rights as well?

I feel like this is another backdoor plan to strip more Americans of their rights. "Unintentional consequences", I believe, in Washington read as : "Main goal"

 

[cbhausen]

Stoned and voluntarily disarmed, what a combination. I wonder how that barter would work for any of the rest of the Bill of Rights? As for the image accompanying the linked article, I'd leave the pot leaf there and take the Beretta 92 Inox.

 

[Thor]

I won't even trade my guns for money...unless that money can immediately be turned into more (and better) guns than I had before. And then I'd at least retain one fully loaded one to defend the $ I just got until said guns are acquired.

Now...if in need...I might trade some ammo for bacon.

 

[other dave]

No freakin' way. And here's what the ATF has to say about FFL's selling guns to medical marijuana users.

http://www.atf.gov/files/press/rele...all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf

 

[Miles42]

Never

 

[GunnerDan]

No freakin' way. And here's what the ATF has to say about FFL's selling guns to medical marijuana users.

http://www.atf.gov/files/press/rele...all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf

I wonder how the ATF would respond if the referenced cannabis users were the limited group of people who received "medicinal cannabis" directly from the federal government under very controlled conditions. Would those people then be restricted from owning guns or ammunition...

Gunner

 

[Faine]

I think the better question is when will the Fed decriminalize? While the good ole' boys love their weed, booze, and guns most wouldn't be willing to trade one for another. Ending the war on drugs or at least removing Marijuana from the list seems like the most likely scenario's going forward. If/when that happens the next question will be how is it classified, stimulant/depressant, both, or neither. With any of those classifications it could still be used to deny you your second amendment rights. This tight rope walk that's being done amuses me, what amuses me even more is that people think others would trade an alienable right for a privilege. I don't care if you were trading the alienable right to pick your nose for the privilege of being a millionaire. They can always take a privilege away, and likely will. Pick your nose a poor man!

 

[funeralweb]

No.

 

[scootn103]

No , cause if i traded i can not protect myself from criminals with a plant unless they wanted it real bad.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Depends on just how much I needed to seal a joint in my plumbing work.

 

[GIJEW]

Even if it were possible, would I trade my rights for drugs, or for that matter, for anything else?

You have a choice of answers. You can have "no" or "F*** no". Pick either one, I don't care which.

Hey anti-rights politicians! I have a different trade for you: Your anti-rights votes, which I'll trade you for a bucket of tar, a truckload of feathers, and a ride out of town on a rail. Do we have a deal?

INGO wouldn't let me rep you-consider--it done! At 1st I thought some troll was fishing for "proof" to slander gun owners with on some post. The 2nd thought was, B.Franklin said "Those who surrender essential liberty for the illusion of security, deserve neither...", I can only imagine what he would think of this "trade"!

 

[daddyusmaximus]

I use my gun to protect my life and that of my family... I'll never give it up.

 

[GunnerDan]

Depends on just how much I needed to seal a joint in my plumbing work.

Ahhh good ole pipe dope... Used it many many times, seems to work well...

Gunner

 

[JettaKnight]

It's already a fed violation to use marijuana and buy guns.

True. The feds don't care about what state law is.

Or any other kinds of drugs, including caffeine which by definition is a stimulant.

"is an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance"

Nope - not everything is classified as a "controlled substance".

No freakin' way. And here's what the ATF has to say about FFL's selling guns to medical marijuana users.

http://www.atf.gov/files/press/rele...all-ffls-marijuana-for-medicinal-purposes.pdf

There's another thread about this.

I wonder how the ATF would respond if the referenced cannabis users were the limited group of people who received "medicinal cannabis" directly from the federal government under very controlled conditions. Would those people then be restricted from owning guns or ammunition...

Why would the federal gov't be handing out illegal drugs?

Until the ATF changes F4473 and their stance on ownership, nothing will change. This story is about IL wanting to heavy-handedly enforce federal laws to the extreme.