• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Hunter Biden Gun Trial

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:
It would be pretty funny if Trump pardon's Hunter, so he probably will.
 
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.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom