Hunter Biden Gun Trial

ponderingturtle said:
Up next every gun owner who visits a weed dispensary is going to get locked up.
Click to expand...

One of the things I was looking forward to when I retired from my job at a federal shipyard was the opportunity to try marijuana. But that would make me run afoul of gun control laws.

Call me queer, but I prefer my guns to drugs. :)

Do legal weed dispensaries keep records of their customers, or do they just verify that they are 21 and older?
 
ponderingturtle said:
Up next every gun owner who visits a weed dispensary is going to get locked up.
Click to expand...

It won't help Hunter, but the feds do need to change the law with regard to pot. The black market in weed still exists because quite a few gun owners are aware of the risk.
 
Ranb said:
Which 2nd Amendment people on this forum have expressed an interest in protecting the rights of drug addicts to own firearms and violate the law when buying them?

I am one of those who wants to see people like Biden pay for their crimes.

I recall discussing drugs and guns with people when state level marijuana laws were being relaxed some years ago. Some of my facebook friends were warning others that form 4473 was a trap waiting to ensnare them. I responded that they needed to choose between their civil rights or drugs. It was not a popular stance.
Click to expand...

idk what any 2a guys are saying about it on any forum, it’s why i’m asking. i figured some of you guys might have a problem with denying someone their 2nd amendment right without due process, which is kind of what the form does.

but yeah seems not. which is fine, to me it makes sense as not a 2a guy. just unexpected to a certain extent. for different reasons it’s entirely expected though.
 
Last edited:
trump isn't buying it and neither are the magamutts.
“This trial has been nothing more than a distraction from the real crimes of the Biden Crime Family, which has raked in tens of millions of dollars from China, Russia and Ukraine,” the Trump campaign said a statement to CNN on Tuesday. “Crooked Joe Biden’s reign over the Biden Family Criminal Empire is all coming to an end on November 5th, and never again will a Biden sell government access for personal profit.” Hahoo News news link
Click to expand...

That's deplorable! ;)
 
dirtywick said:
idk what any 2a guys are saying about it on any forum, it’s why i’m asking. i figured some of you guys might have a problem with denying someone their 2nd amendment right without due process, which is kind of what the form does.

but yeah seems not. which is fine, to me it makes sense as not a 2a guy. just unexpected to a certain extent. for different reasons it’s entirely expected though.
Click to expand...
I think so, the problem is that he pretty clearly broke the law but it's a pretty dumb law that probably does violate the 6th amendment.
 
dirtywick said:
idk what any 2a guys are saying about it on any forum, it’s why i’m asking. i figured some of you guys might have a problem with denying someone their 2nd amendment right without due process, which is kind of what the form does.

but yeah seems not. which is fine, to me it makes sense as not a 2a guy. just unexpected to a certain extent. for different reasons it’s entirely expected though.
Click to expand...

Biden lied on an official form; essentially a written confession to a crime.

He was indicted, had a trial and was convicted. How does the form deny due process?
 
Ranb said:
Biden lied on an official form; essentially a written confession to a crime.

He was indicted, had a trial and was convicted. How does the form deny due process?
Click to expand...
I think the argument is that the form itself imposes an unconstitutional control/limitation on someone's 2A rights to own a firearm. Thus the form itself is invalid to begin with, even if Hunter was coked to the eyeballs and brandishing a Glock while he signed it. Thus there is no crime.

Or something.
 
Norman Alexander said:
I think the argument is that the form itself imposes an unconstitutional control/limitation on someone's 2A rights to own a firearm. Thus the form itself is invalid to begin with, even if Hunter was coked to the eyeballs and brandishing a Glock while he signed it. Thus there is no crime.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, Biden's lawyers did not use that defense.
 
Ranb said:
Biden lied on an official form; essentially a written confession to a crime.

He was indicted, had a trial and was convicted. How does the form deny due process?
Click to expand...

i mean, it’s not really my argument. just one that I’ve read. but so it goes in essence a form isn’t due process-y enough to take away a constitutional right.

since i’m having trouble coming up with other civil rights that can be taken via form without some kind of criminal conviction they may have a point. one that i thought they would have argued, but haven’t really seen.

but again, i don’t agree. i think they should take guns away for much less. just kind of surprising is all.
 
marting said:
Trump vows to save Hunter.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...rst-son-s-second-amendment-rights/ar-BB1o2suX

“His father, one of our worst presidents, is more concerned with making the gun control people happy, so he won’t have the courage to step in here and help Hunter. Don’t worry, Joe – I will Save your son after I get elected (for the third time)!”
Click to expand...

Not Trump's words, but a statement. That means someone else wrote it, and Donny probably has no idea what's going on with this case.

Also, from the same report:
“Hunter might deserve to be in jail for something, but purchasing a gun is not it,” Representative Thomas Massie (R., Ky.) said. “There are millions of marijuana users who own guns in this country, and none of them should be in jail for purchasing or possessing a firearm against current laws.”
Click to expand...
The gun rights people ARE turning this into a constitutional thing. Anyone know what the Venn diagram for Florida's gun owners versus Florida's weed users looks like? A perfect circle?
 
President Biden has said he won't pardon his son.

I have no reason not to believe that. But, there are things a President can do short of a pardon.

He has the power to commute a sentence. When all things are said and done and it's time for Hunter to report to a prison (if that ever happens) Biden has the power to commute the sentence and keep his pledge not to pardon.

Keep in mind that a commutation does not wipe out the conviction.
 
I would be very disappointed in Biden if he didn't pardon Hunter right after the election, should the verdict be upheld.
 
CarbShark said:
President Biden has said he won't pardon his son.

I have no reason not to believe that. But, there are things a President can do short of a pardon.

He has the power to commute a sentence. When all things are said and done and it's time for Hunter to report to a prison (if that ever happens) Biden has the power to commute the sentence and keep his pledge not to pardon.

Keep in mind that a commutation does not wipe out the conviction.
Click to expand...

I heard that he said that and that's exactly what I thought too.

However, apparently he has now added that he won't commute his sentence either.

Biden says he won’t pardon Hunter Biden or commute his sentence in first public remarks after guilty verdict (CNN)

“I’m extremely proud of my son Hunter. He has overcome an addiction, he’s one of the brightest, most decent men I know,” Biden said during a news conference on the margins of the G7 summit.

“I am satisfied that I’m not going to do anything — I said I’d abide by the jury decision. I will do that. And I will not pardon him,” he added.
Click to expand...
Biden reaffirmed that he would not pardon his son, echoing a commitment he made last week, before he was convicted in his gun case.

The president also went a step further Thursday, saying he would not consider commuting his son’s sentence. Presidents have the power both pardon and commute, or reduce, sentences in federal cases.
Click to expand...

I think it would be a corrupt act, as well as now a broken promise, if he were to use his presidential power to intervene on his son's behalf.

ETA: And if Trump should win the election, it would give him a further excuse to pardon himself. "Look what Joe did."
 
Last edited:
GQAsXM2aQAAtc6t
 
This trial juxtaposed to the Trump cases is a study in the schizophrenia of the US legal system.
"We must not seem politically motivated, so:
- we need to bend over backwards to accommodate person A and only charge when we have an appeals-proof case
- we need to make sure we charge them with something to prove that no one is above a crime no one else gets charged with on it's own

Pick a lane!
 
It's also funny how we all immediately recognize that image as "Jesus" even though nobody knows what he actually looked like. If we saw the actual person (if he actually existed) we'd probably think "Hey, that's not what he's supposed to look like."
 
Puppycow said:
It's also funny how we all immediately recognize that image as "Jesus" even though nobody knows what he actually looked like. If we saw the actual person (if he actually existed) we'd probably think "Hey, that's not what he's supposed to look like."
Click to expand...
Jesus would look like someone Bogative would report elsewhere as yet another a brown Middle Eastern illegal who was tortured to death by other brown Middle Eastern illegals, thus proving Biden's stupid open borders.

Or something.
 
you'd think someone who makes such a big deal what a militant Christian he is would know Christ didn't write the Gospels
 
Ranb said:
Do legal weed dispensaries keep records of their customers, or do they just verify that they are 21 and older?
Click to expand...

In most states where weed is legal it's not illegal for weed dispensaries to sell marijuana to gun owners and it's not illegal for gun owners to buy marijuana.

It's also not illegal for gun dealers to sell a gun to a drug user (if the drug user has not lied about using drugs). It is illegal for a drug user to lie on the form about being a drug user and to buy a gun. Until now that's been enforced via the honor system.

Since that law has been effect there have been about a dozen cases where that crime was charged and every single one of those was in connection with a more serious felony, until now.

You can keep your guns if you buy and use marijuana. You just can't buy more guns, unless you want to lie on the form, in which case, if you happen to be the son of a prominent politician they'll throw the book at you.
 
CarbShark said:
It's also not illegal for gun dealers to sell a gun to a drug user (if the drug user has not lied about using drugs). It is illegal for a drug user to lie on the form about being a drug user and to buy a gun. Until now that's been enforced via the honor system.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting this from?

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=&req=18+U.S.+Code+?+922
"It shall be unlawful for any person-

"(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to marihuana or any depressant or stimulant drug (as defined in section 201(v) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) or narcotic drug (as defined in section 4731(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954); or

to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce."
Click to expand...
It seems that is it entirely illegal for a drug user to receive a gun from a dealer.
 
Ranb said:
An FFL is not in violation of the law when selling a gun to a drug user, only if they can claim ignorance of the buyer's drug use. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

Where are you getting your information from?
Click to expand...


From the law, of course. Here's the relevant text:

It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person, including as a juvenile—
...
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802))...
Click to expand...

So unless the dealer knows or has cause to believe the buyer is an unlawful user or an addict, they are not breaking the law. And, since the buyer in this case affirmed on the firearm purchase application that he was not an unlawful user or addict, the dealer did not have reasonable cause to believe he was.

The dealer did not break the law. The buyer did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom