|
Post by mapper on Jun 11, 2024 15:48:08 GMT -5
I am aware what it says..and I read it to be your choice, weed or weapons, not both.. Hence my post of unscheduled it and treating like tobacco or alcohol.
But hunter's issue wasn't weed.. It was stimulant, or controlled substance, coke.. And previously I posted the definitions per us code.. Time frame is a year, unless other factors, could be 5 years..
So clearly he was no choir boy..got dismissed from his reserve for it.. see previous link.
You forgot if the gun was stolen and used in a crime..
So do you want to be the test case on this to see how it works if your name is NOT Biden? I would not. THAT'S MY POINT.
Now for educational purposes Swing again batter..
|
|
|
Post by meateater on Jun 11, 2024 15:48:55 GMT -5
Well, the issue i have with laws existing and not being enforced is that it erodes the rule of law for the governed. Marijuana in its scheduled form is a either or choice. It shouldn't be. Remove the classification. Treat it like tobacco or alcohol. Now in hunters case it wasn't weed..it was coke. That's a different issue. Would you say there is no threat to society by allowing a coke user to have a firearm? Surely they have a rational thought process..and in control. I mean Joe Biden wants everyone to get a background check so they don't fall in wrong hands. All I'm suggesting is fair and equal enforcement of laws/rules.
In other words what would happen to you or I in the same case? Would the law be imposed equally since we are not hunter biden?
You would have had the gun taken away and a slap on the wrist, maybe a fine or more likely probation, unless you had previous convictions or used the weapon in a crime. Heck, I am seen two time losers who robbed people get probation after violating their current probation. The odds are they would never know about it unless you used it in a crime or a family member turned you in. They don't have agents running around checking to be sure you didn't lie on the form. Just an FYI, the form specifically mentions Marijuana violates the law to buy a gun. It is the only drug mentioned by name. 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. damnit swing and a miss.
|
|
|
Post by tonyroma on Jun 11, 2024 15:49:43 GMT -5
Nobody is rah rah Biden. That’s the difference. Fuck , I wanted Amy Klobashar to win. That’s hard to spell.
|
|
|
Post by meateater on Jun 11, 2024 15:53:24 GMT -5
not a lot of hot women named molly, more hot chicks named gunnar or hank then molly. ya, I had a hard time thinking of one. Only other Molly I could think of was Shannon and she ain’t hot. molly shannon, thats flirting with disaster.
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on Jun 11, 2024 16:35:04 GMT -5
i dont defend trump, i despise him as a person, hate his tiny dick trophy hunting son don jr. i dont make excuses for failed policies or defend dumb retarded decisions no matter who makes them you make excuses for biden for everything, heres one for you, i was 100% wrong about john fetterman, i thought he was the stupidest dipshit on the planet but then i got to watch and listen to biden, boy was i wrong about him. see i can admit when im wrong. I never made an excuse for Biden. My reply was not about Biden, but what those men actually said. I did not excuse or defend Biden in any way. You are making shit up that you claim i said or did. Read what the fuck I said. I was defending the 50 officers and what they actually said, not what was claimed they said. My reply had nothing to do with Biden. Funny thing did any of the 50 ask the question or do any research? Did they investigate. NO, THEY ARE ALL HACKS! And Joe 100% lied about it during the debate.
|
|
|
Post by tonyroma on Jun 11, 2024 16:48:25 GMT -5
I never made an excuse for Biden. My reply was not about Biden, but what those men actually said. I did not excuse or defend Biden in any way. You are making shit up that you claim i said or did. Read what the fuck I said. I was defending the 50 officers and what they actually said, not what was claimed they said. My reply had nothing to do with Biden. Funny thing did any of the 50 ask the question or do any research? Did they investigate. NO, THEY ARE ALL HACKS! And Joe 100% lied about it during the debate. They should have an investigation.
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on Jun 11, 2024 16:53:43 GMT -5
For the Russians at this point, with Trump down in the polls, there is incen<ve for Moscow to pull out the stops to do anything possible to help Trump win and/or to weaken Biden should he win. A “laptop op” fits the bill, as the publica<on of the emails are clearly designed to discredit Biden.
|
|
|
Post by biminitwisted on Jun 11, 2024 17:00:07 GMT -5
Trump, a convicted felon, admitted to his NY probation officer that he has a gun in Florida. This is a violation of his Georgia bond conditions.
But gun laws don't apply to MAGA
|
|
|
Post by tonyroma on Jun 11, 2024 17:05:11 GMT -5
Trump, a convicted felon, admitted to his NY probation officer that he has a gun in Florida. This is a violation of his Georgia bond conditions. But gun laws don't apply to MAGA I bet Trump hasn’t fired a gun since the military academy.
|
|
|
Post by mapper on Jun 11, 2024 19:15:09 GMT -5
So the question still remains, If your name is biden is it this? Or if your name ISN'T biden is it a knock and talk visit?
|
|
|
Post by Tarponator on Jun 12, 2024 1:20:17 GMT -5
Wait, no ranting about the rigged justice system? No threatening retribution? No hyperbolic nonsense to rile his base up? As opposed to the petulant whining of an eternal victim, it's nice to see the leader of this country handling adversity the right way.
Like a man.
Thanks, Joe.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jun 12, 2024 6:59:50 GMT -5
Wait, no ranting about the rigged justice system? No threatening retribution? No hyperbolic nonsense to rile his base up? As opposed to the petulant whining of an eternal victim, it's nice to see the leader of this country handling adversity the right way.
Like a man.
Thanks, Joe.
You know, I know, and Hunter knows, no matter what daddy says now, after the election in November, there is a pardon coming his way. There is no reason not to. What's Congress going to do? If Biden loses, he's out of there and F all of them. If he wins, they might try another impeachment hearing, but the pardon is a Presidential constitutional power. Besides, if they impeach Biden, Harris is the President and that lady scares them more than Biden ever could.
|
|
|
Post by ferris1248 on Jun 12, 2024 9:24:40 GMT -5
But what happens if the dems take the house?
Puts Jeffries third in line.
|
|
|
Post by mapper on Jun 12, 2024 10:39:45 GMT -5
The only appeal I can see would be one using Bruen and historical method. Now if there was an old law/rule in place barring a habitual drunkard from having a weapon that would not work. So it would be on constitutional grounds. Otherwise as it is written on 4473 form, and by definitions in us code He did not follow it, it is a simple yes/no, on/off, question.
As much as biden has a hard on for infringing gun rights and trying to push background checks on everything, changing rules on frame and receiver, engaged in business, and braces to make previous law abiding citizens felons overnight, then the atf knock and talk tactics for multiple sales, all of which legal by the way. It would be a turn around for one of the writers/proponents of original assault weapons ban to support a constitutional appeal.
Easier for him to lie about it and pardon his fuckup son.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jun 12, 2024 10:51:37 GMT -5
The only appeal I can see would be one using Bruen and historical method. Now if there was an old law/rule in place barring a habitual drunkard from having a weapon that would not work. So it would be on constitutional grounds. Otherwise as it is written on 4473 form, and by definitions in us code He did not follow it, it is a simple yes/no, on/off, question.
As much as biden has a hard on for infringing gun rights and trying to push background checks on everything, changing rules on frame and receiver, engaged in business, and braces to make previous law abiding citizens felons overnight, then the atf knock and talk tactics for multiple sales, all of which legal by the way. It would be a turn around for one of the writers/proponents of original assault weapons ban to support a constitutional appeal.
Easier for him to lie about it and pardon his fuckup son.
There is already a case based on the second amendment involving drug users. The fifth circuit said the form is unconstitutional and it is headed to SCOTUS if they decide to hear it. If not the 5th circuit ruling stands. If SCOTUS takes the case and rules the form unconstitutional, I think it would nullify Hunter's conviction without any appeal, but Bullfrog may correct me on that.
|
|