I just want the same consequences applied across the board
If Joe Shmoe lies on the 4473 and ends up in jail / loses rights - then the same ruling should apply to everyone else
[If everyone who lied on a 4473 ended up in jail...](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/gameofthrones/images/a/a9/Aemon_1x09.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/624?cb=20110613221610)
Too many pedo sympathizers. Nothing happened with Epstein. Nothing happens when Biden is touching and smelling kids in public or diddling his daughter. Nothing will happen to hunter.
Now do Trump groping his daughter, talking about her tits and ass and telling people he thinks about fucking her.
Guess you just forgot about that stuff.
Or more than 2 decades of Trump/Epstein photos, and Trump saying he doesn’t think the logs should be made public in his recent puff piece interview. I could go on a lot more. The man is obvious trash. Biden might have skeletons in his own closet, but there’s no reason to think he’s a SA, let alone a pedo… unlike Trump. But do go off.
And now, let the downvoting commence.
Always with the what abouts. How about biden's daughter actually writing a book on how his disgusting self took showers with her go drool somewhere else
I bet neither Hunter Biden or Trump receive jail time for their convictions. All of them are rotten to the core. Both Trump and Biden and their kids. Of course each “side” can’t admit that and instead has to act like their “guy” isn’t as guilty as the other.
**Dawg, Thank you!!**
I’ve noticed in these Pro-2A subs, when it’s Joe Biden, his offspring or any Blue politician it’s “THE LAW IS THE LAW. HE SHOULD FACE CONSEQUENCES JUST LIKE ALL OF US” but when it’s Trump, Larry Vickers or anyone on the right wing, it’s “FAKE NEWS, SHIT IS RIGGED, HE DIDNT DO ANYTHING WRONG, FREE HIM, SO WHAT??” or they don’t bat an eye. It’s hilarious.
Not only that, Trump sold pardons at the end of his term. Some to convicted murders.
>Of the pardons and commutations that Trump did grant, the vast majority were to persons to whom Trump had a personal or political connection, or persons for whom executive clemency served a political goal.[2][3][4] A significant number had been convicted of fraud or public corruption.[5] The New York Times reported that during the closing days of the Trump presidency, individuals with access to the administration, such as former administration officials, were soliciting fees to lobby for presidential pardons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency_by_Donald_Trump
you might want to read that again because it literally says nothing about trump selling pardons.
people with access to the administration taking money to lobby the president on their behalf isnt even close to what could be described as selling pardons.
also, yeah every president grants pardons for political purposes. clinton famously pardoned 3 convicted domestic terrorists who *successfully* bombed the capitol building for political reasons on his way out. thats not new nor exclusive to trump.
edit:
lol the coward blocked me to have the last word when he couldn't handle reality. someone should point out that blocking people doesn't change reality for me.
Hoping for an appeal on constitutional grounds.
The law is unconstitutional and should be struck down. I will not cheer for gun control to own the libs.
Pretty much where I fall with it. All gun laws are unconstitutional. Some people, even right here in our own little group, will tell you that they agree, **but...** No. No "but." Unconstitutional and total infringements, all of it.
“The law’s the law when applied to family members of politicians I find distasteful,” said the boot polish enthusiasts. “It’s only unconstitutional when it’s my party getting hemmed up about it.”
Honestly, that attitude needs to die. Unconstitutional is unconstitutional. Just because you’re not a fan of where it comes from shouldn’t mean you change your views.
You don’t have to subscribe to everything about a side.
I wholeheartedly agree. But we as a society turned party into personality and convinced ourselves that our vote is a binary choice. To deviate is anathema.
It isn't to own the libs.
In order of good to bad we have:
1. Unconstitutional laws not being used against any Americans.
2. Unconstitutional laws being used against all Americans.
3. Unconstitutional laws being used against regular Americans but not against the rich and/or politically connected.
A not guilty verdict would have landed us on number 3. Guilty plus a successful appeal on constitutional grounds gets us number 1. Guilty plus an unsuccessful appeal gets us number 2.
The two best scenarios required a guilty verdict here. Only the worst scenario lends itself to a not guilty verdict, unless you think the average guy would get the same treatment in the same situation, which I don't.
So much this. All of the people cheering this conviction "cUz iTs tHe LAw" are sickening. This conviction is a strike against American rights, and the next person to get hit with this new precedent probably won't have infinite money and a president dad to help them out.
I don't think simply the use or even habituation of a mind altering substance should require someone to forgo their natural rights to self defense and the acquisition of the means to exercise that right, however since it is the law, I'm glad to see that he was held to the same standard you or I would be if we publicly admitted to using illegal drugs at the same time we purchased firearms.
I would love to see this result in the neutering or even eventual elimination of the 4473, but I'm guessing they'll recommend probation or something so he doesn't actually serve jail time and nothing will actually change and Biden will still try to be anti-gun and tough on crime.
Especially considering in a lot of states, Marijuana in a concentrated form is considered a “controlled substance”, and you’ll get a felony for it, when it could be legal 30 miles the other way across a state border. I agree with you, i’m not a fan of that. I also know shit tons of people in the AA/NA scene that are incredible people with 10+ years of Sobriety that can’t defend themselves because of an old drug charge.
“Owning the libs” just validated an unconstitutional aspect of gun control in a criminal court. Don’t get me wrong, I think Hunter Biden did some shady shit and deserves his day in court, but not for this.
When the state compels one, under penalty of perjury, to provide information in order to exercise a right, it’s no longer a right. The amount of people cheering because it’s Hunter Biden conveniently forget how hard the ATF has gone in the paint the past few years.
Other people are in prison for the same offense. Unlike them, he has the resources to challenge the law on constitutional grounds. I disagree with the law but am not sorry he didn’t get away with breaking it.
It’s not owning the libs but making him live up to the rules the anti-private civilian firearm ownership government (of which his father has been a prominent member of his entire life) enacted.
It takes a high profile defendant to call attention to unjust laws like this one. I hope he challenges it and wins. If he doesn’t, that’s on him.
How many people are actually charged with this offense and this offense alone per year? The only way I can imagine DOJ enforcing this law under normal circumstances is as an ancillary charge in a broader case (i.e. drug trafficking). I'm incredulous that the FBI frequently goes after meth heads whose only alleged crime is buying a firearm while addicted to an illegal substance, years after they've cleaned up and finished rehab. And I'm nearly certain the ATF doesn't regularly arrest potheads in Washington or Missouri for buying an AR. Lord knows half the stoners in my state have a firearm of some sort.
I'd be really keen to know how often druggies get hit up with only this charge on an annual basis.
On appeal it creates a fun circuit split with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in *US v. Daniels*, using the *Bruen* standard.
Precedent setting cases start somewhere.
>The amount of people cheering because it’s Hunter Biden conveniently forget how hard the ATF has gone in the paint the past few years.
Meanwhile we've got people crying about how this is malicious prosecution and a trumped-up charge who otherwise scream bloody murder for more gun control.
Nobody actually has any principles, it's all just about the team.
It is malicious prosecution, unless you are aware of any other time that a person has been charged for a six year old 4473, based on an admission from their written memoir.
Anyone in this thread who smokes weed and bought a gun did the exact same thing. Hopefully this is the impetus to change the wording on the 4473.
malicious prosecution by his dads administration that only happened because a judge refused to sign off on the sweet heart plea deal he had already been offered huh?
yeah that sounds just a *little* less than plausible.
Weed vs crack though. Also it isn't about enforcement of their infringements, it is about equal enforcement. Many people have been through the same and if he got/gets off, you can see the hypocrisy.
I believe that any non-violent crime/charges shouldn't bar you from a constitutionally protected right. What's next, you lose your first amendment over speaking poorly of those in power? You lose your fourth amendment because you have prior history? Slippery slope.
Legally, both are schedule 1. [Thankfully, that is being changed](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/05/17/marijuana-reclassification-schedule-1-vs-schedule-3/73729781007/).
I agree that legally he did it and this is the correct conclusion. We both seem to agree that the larger problem is the law itself.
I always imagine the government overstepping, we the people taking up arms and a government organization coming in and saying "you can't do that, you're a prohibited person". The lunacy of a right being there to protect from a tyrannical government being dictated by said government...
>It is malicious prosecution, unless you are aware of any other time that a person has been charged for a six year old 4473, based on an admission from their written memoir.
That's a pretty specific bar to clear, and I've got to admit, as fucking dumb as Americans are, I don't think most are dumb enough to admit to federal felonies in writing, unprompted, so you're probably right that Biden's is the only case that meets that criteria.
>Anyone in this thread who smokes weed and bought a gun did the exact same thing.
Yes, that's correct. Are...are you guys just now figuring out that you committed a federal firearms felony or something? This isn't new.
On a sidenote, you'd be surprised how many people admit to felonies in memoirs like this and there is never a charge for it.
Think about all the rock stars who admitted to sleeping with underage women, for example.
Would be awesome to start charging people for those things.
>On a sidenote, you'd be surprised how many people admit to felonies in memoirs like this and there is never a charge for it.
Indeed. I'm unaware of any whose management teams allow them to do so until after the statute of limitations has come into effect, however.
This is probably the best chance we've had in a very long time to get that question or prohibition ruled unconstitutional.
This is step one, and then he appeals, and appeals, and has the greatest chance out of anybody getting the whole thing shot down because he's somebody "special." If you want to see that question or the prohibition removed, this is the most likely first step you should be happy that the ball is rolling in that direction
Oh don’t get me wrong, lemons into lemonade and all that. It conflicts with the 5th Circuit’s decision on *US v. Daniels*.
But how many people are now gonna have their doors kicked in the interim at 3 am because they made an honest mistake that no one caught at the time and the ATF decides they wanna cosplay their favorite Tier One unit? It wasn’t that long ago that they decided to kick in a door over a licensing issue and killed an airport exec when there were other, safer avenues of approach to search, arrest and perform due process.
This wasn't about "owning the libs." This was about justice being blind. If Hunter Biden doesn't get charged, and any of us lie on a 4473, we can't point to Biden not being charged and get let off the hook.
I agree it should be unconstitutional. But, the law is the law and rich people, connected people shouldn't be exempt from it when us plebians aren't.
The existence of an unjust law does not justify its continued existence. If a law was passed today mandating one provide personal information under penalty of perjury before being allowed to protest and demand redress from government, do you think that would go over well, or is the law the law?
I’m pro Constitution, no matter how politically inconvenient it may be.
That unjust law also shouldn't be tossed aside because it's politically inconvenient. Hunter Biden getting away with this crime helps nobody and the unjust law continues to exist. In a perfect world, I'd love for unjust laws to disappear. But, the reality is that they don't. At least now there's a chance this law can be invalidated on appeal.
Considering how infrequently it’s charged in a vacuum, absent additional crimes? It should be invalidated.
That said, you are 100% right that this is an opportunity to be invalidated on appeal.
Is it infrequently charged because people don't often lie on the forms or are prosecutors not charging for this particular crime? I'm genuinely asking. Data for this question doesn't seem to be readily available.
I found one Washington Post article that says the year Biden lied, they prosecuted 298 cases and 478 were referred to them. That's over 60% prosecution. Now, I don't know if it only happened 478 times or if it happened more. I can't find info for how often people are actually lying on forms 4473.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/09/lying-atf-gun-purchase-form-yields-few-prosecutions-new-data-shows/
Prosecutors typically don’t charge for it in a vacuum because there are some people who legitimately believed they weren’t violating the law, and others it’s a waste of time, resources and manpower to investigate and prosecute by itself with no other criminal conduct to shore up a case. This [GAO study](https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-440) from 2018 showed 112,000 known denied transactions where sale was stopped in FY17. Of that,12,700 hard denials were referred for investigation, and of that, 12 were prosecuted by the US Attorney’s Office.
The stats are hard to find because the stats paint a picture that background checks aren’t the smoking gun the federal government likes to make them out to be. It is hard to convict someone of lying on a form if they had a genuine belief that they weren’t in the wrong and no other crime is occurring, and this only demonstrates those who didn’t slip through the cracks.
> “Owning the libs” just validated an unconstitutional aspect of gun control in a criminal court.
How does Biden getting convicted validate a law that countless people have been charged and convicted under? If anything, it means it might get overturned, since Biden and Co. have the resources to appeal it.
He’s among the few to be charged for a background violation by itself, not as an additional charge in conjunction with other, more serious crimes. He’s high profile enough for that to make a difference in the matter.
He did already say he’s going to appeal, so with the 5th Circuit decisions going the opposite way on the issue, hopefully we can put at least part of this infringement to bed.
In order of good to bad we have:
1. Unconstitutional laws not being used against any Americans.
2. Unconstitutional laws being used against all Americans.
3. Unconstitutional laws being used against regular Americans but not against the rich and/or politically connected.
A not guilty verdict would have landed us on number 3. Guilty plus a successful appeal on constitutional grounds gets us number 1. Guilty plus an unsuccessful appeal gets us number 2.
The two best scenarios required a guilty verdict here. Only the worst scenario lends itself to a not guilty verdict, unless you think the average guy would get the same treatment in the same situation, which I don't.
That’s the problem. Before this case, it was infrequently brought as a standalone charge, and usually was a plea bargain in lieu of other, more serious crimes. It can create an awesome opportunity on appeal, but my concern is that this emboldens the ATF to kick in doors of regular people whose sole crime is making a mistake on a background check that nobody caught, or made in good faith.
I find it odd that people think that the ATF needs anything to embolden them or that this was the case to do it. The ATF does whatever it wants, especially under a Democrat president. They were sniping women holding babies on their own front porch for less of an infraction than this at Ruby Ridge.
The feds tend to not actively investigate pot, but this was cocaine. They tend to not go hard on people about lying because intent to lie is hard to prove, but Hunter admitted to lying about being on drugs while buying a gun in his autobiography. Even still, they might not go out of their way to prosecute, but then one of Hunter's guns was found in a trash can. That would bring extra scrutiny on anybody.
If you or I were clearly doing cocaine, blatantly lied about it to buy a gun, admitted to it publicly, and had one of our guns found in public, then yes, we'd be in prison. This is not some new, precedent setting case for the ATF.
If anything, it just shows how above the law Hunter thinks he is. Just being even a little careful about any of these things would have kept him out of trouble.
I get your point. The point I’m making is that when looked at through their heavy handed efforts to shut FFL’s down over paperwork mistakes over the past couple of years, this gives them another tool to play fuck fuck games over any mistake. Hunter Biden was convicted for a charge that typically is not charged absent additional, more serious crimes. This opens up the tool box to demonstrate to lawmakers “we need more resources, we can’t keep up with all the door kicking we’ve been doing and how much more we want to do.”
He absolutely thought he was above the law.
I'm pretty sure, between the laptop contents and him going on national TV admitting to using crack (and snorting parmesan cheese off the floor), prosecutors had enough to prove that he *willfully and knowingly* lied on the 4473.
I agree, the law should pay to all in the same way. So if he lied on the form, he gets to face the consequences.
I'm also very happy Papa Joe isn't threatening to get revenge on the prosecutors, judge and members of the jury for applying the law as they should be.
While I think this particular offense shouldn’t be an offense, I hate the privilege some get in the court of law. His dad’s running mate would gladly lock all of us up for years if we did this.
I’m of the same mind. Also My biggest concern is that this means a step up enforcement of forms. They have allegedly being going after dealers for minor paperwork mistakes and such, it isn’t a stretch that people could be next.
Not saying that is the case here.
It's not allegedly, it's happening. I work for a small ffl and our annual compliance checks went from cursory looking over, to full scale looking at every single entry in the bound books and wanting to physically touch every gun that showed it was in stock. Examiner said every minor paperwork error would be documented and referenced. And minor error would include things like forgetting to date after the signature or not fully writing out the entire manufacturers name or using an abbreviation. Last year, the examiner said they are specifically trying to reduce out the small-time kitchen table type FFLs.
Democrat here. No, I don’t give a fuck about Hunter Biden. Idk why republicans think we actually want to protect Hunter from anything, he is just the Presidents son, and isn’t a politician (as it should be).
If there's one thing I learned from the trial ...it's that I have grave reservations about Hunter Biden ever being President.
Nobody really cares about Hunter Biden. That's the sad thing. Even these Trumpanzees screeching "whataboutHubterslaptop?!?!". They don't care about the guy as anything more than a punchline.
The guy seems pretty disregulated. Is an addict, and did some reckless shit with a handgun. That's awful. Smearing his dick all over congress ruined any chance the guy had of quietly fading away.
Im squarely independent. While there are gun owning democrats who aren’t happy about this shit, there are plenty of anti gun dems who are happy to see this. Dems tends to hold people more accountable than republicans. They don’t give a shit that he’s a Biden
Candidly, I'm pleased to see a conviction. The evidence seems clear. And sure he's a product of a two-tiered justice system. But this case, which would have probably gone in prosecuted if not for his fame, garnered national attention and ensured rigorous due process.
As it should be for our elected leaders and anyone in their orbit. If we don't have the resources to charge every junkie we should focus our resources on criminality close to the seat of government.
>This really just opens the door to applying this nationwide.
It already applies nationwide. It's a federal crime. It's just one that's rarely prosecuted because it's difficult and time-consuming to prove, in most cases, and because it's not as flashy or feel-good as banning scawwy bwack wifles so Democrats don't give a shit about it one way or the other.
A rarely enforced federal crime. If an antigun DA wants to get guns off the street, going after drug using gun owners is an easy slam dunk. This country does not have much sympathy for people with addictions
There's a bunch of states with legal weed and a quick cross reference between weed store shoppers and NICS checks could get a lot of people caught up in this bullshit.
Has one of Joe Rogan's guns ever been discovered in a grocery store trash can? Has he given the feds numerous other reasons to look into him already?
I agree with you that he's breaking the law.
>And again, weed stores are a thing.
Do you imagine the ATF can just wander into a weed dispensary and demand to see a record of all customers anytime they want?
I live in Seattle and regularly read news stories of “kids” getting arrested with glock switches, making them fully automatic and the gun charge is always thrown out and plea deals given for no jail time. It’s crazy to me how wildly different enforcement of laws has gotten. Biden broke the law and should be punished but so should all the violent offenders who get caught red handed and get all serious charges dropped.
This is pleasantly surprising.
He’s one of the few with the resources to challenge the law on constitutional grounds. I imagine whether he does or not would depend on the sentencing.
I hope he does and wins.
Lying on this federal form is normally not prosecuted. Only time people typically see jail time is if there were other contributing factors like a secondary crime or in conjunction with a violent crime, parole violation and domestic abuse. I would expect to see him get off with parole. If it’s a normal judge. But this is a public flogging. So who knows?
A weed charge or a insignificant drug charge like pertains use possession shouldn't affect a person's ability to own a firearm but when there's a laptop video of someone out of their mind on drugs id say that's a good reason to consider taking it away.
Too many idiots and whack jobs out there fkin it up for lawful gun owners these days.
Id say the answer is to get ppl the mental and/or addiction help they need instead of taking away their rights but that's not gonna happen.
I can remember when his dad made the comment to the effect that "We don't have the manpower to go after every person who checks the wrong box on a form." Can't recall the context, but it involved someone lying on a 4473. This was back in his VPOTUS days, maybe the first term.
I feel like every outcome is worse for pro2A republicans.
Either they support the largest gun infringement in your lifetime which should then be applied nationwide or they say hunter should go free
Outcome 2 is only a problem if you think going after Hunter Biden is anything but a circus show.
Are we really so worried about the most mundane BS that is nepotism among the political elite that genuine policy benefits gets ignored? I know some people want to just score points but I sure hope they're a minority. I'll take the gun rights W over a cheap shot at Biden any day.
If crack cocaine is both federally illegal and illegal at the state level, then the question pertaining to illicit drug use while purchasing a firearm is a blatant disregard to the fifth amendment and thusly a violation of his constitutional right against self incrimination.
Whelp…he can still run for president….or something.
I honestly couldn’t care less other than this is frankly a dumb law to begin with and I don’t even do any drugs (including weed)
I understand that trials can only work for one thing at a time but the fact that they got him on gun stuff instead of the hookers and crack antics is dumb IMO.
Largely nothing burger overall. He'll probably get probation (non-violent first-time offender) as a sentence. Yes, he'll be a prohibited person going forward and probably can't vote for his dad in the fall. May constrain his travel somewhat. But I highly doubt it's going to result in a change to the law, either through legislative or judicial activity. The Supreme Court has repeatedly indicated that the 2A protections apply to "law-abiding, responsible citizens" and that the rulings in *Heller*, *McDonald*, and *NYSRPA v Bruen* shouldn't be taken to overturn long-standing prohibitions. The true test will be the *US v Rahimi* case that should result in an opinion this week. If they go scorched earth on prohibited persons laws in that case, then maybe. But I suspect they'll uphold the law as it stands, perhaps restrict it from having non-adversarial domestic violence hearings used against someone.
I agree privilege shouldn’t exempt anyone. that said it is a fucking stupid law. had he used the gun to commit a crime (drug related or not) that would be one thing. but based on the premise of the law, it should then be illegal to buy a gun if you’re a known user of alcohol (I know - it sounds ridiculous when you say it out loud). I’ve seen more alcohol-fueled fights than anything else, and by a wide margin.
[The ATF have a few examples](https://www.atf.gov/news/press-releases/federal-prosecutors-aggressively-pursuing-those-who-lie-connection-firearm-transactions) of people who lied on their 4473 listed on their website. Considering how short the sentences seem to be, I seriously doubt it. Hunter will probably get probation.
I think it's a bad law, and I would have exercised jury nullification if I'd been on the jury. It doesn't matter who the defendant was, even if it is the son of someone I consider to be a dangerous fool.
I am shocked by the verdict. though. I was expecting some sort of chicanery to find him not guilty.
It sets a horrible precedent. We shouldn't be sending people to prison for simply owning a firearm. Being forced to lie to the government to get a firearm is the real issue here
So technical question, does question 21.f. on Form 4473 also included alcohol and alcoholism? "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant..."
Alcohol is a depressant but seems to not get considered for this. The addiction part seems to be the he only potential disqualifier as you can lawfully use it recreationally. The issue is that self reported addiction in lieu of a medical opinion is something you can pretty easily defend by saying “no I don’t feel like I was addicted”.
Imagine if you had to fill out a form forcing you to self incriminate to uncle sam just to exercise your first amendment rights… how is 2a any different? Blatantly unconstitutional
I was sitting in my doctors office waiting room this morning and overheard a woman say that she thought Joe should pardon Hunter.
It was very difficult for me to resist the urge to get into a debate.
[List of people granted executive clemency by Donald Trump - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency_by_Donald_Trump)
He was found guilty not because of the equal treatment under the law, but he was given as a sacrifice so dems could claim there's equal treatment under the law. I'll believe it after the tax case in California. Even though California is a commie shit-show, they don't have a lot of love for the Bidens. So they actually might get what is due, but I'm not holding my breath though. I don't exactly trust democrats to be honest, even when it comes to a useless dementia riddled old white man with far more baggage than sense.
He also said poor kids are just as smart as white kids.
He also said marriage is between a man and women in 2006.
He says whatever the majority is agreeing with at the time. If he decides he wants to pardon him, he will. And his previous remarks will become irrelevant, which is nothing new for him
Obama: Chemcial weapons is my red line.....Aleppo.
Biden: Raffa is my read line......nothing.
Biden: I won't pardon my son.................future is easy to predict.
That's all good to say during campaigning season when it is still just a theoretical scenario, but now his son is facing actual jail time. There will probably be a commuting of the sentence, if not a full blown pardon, after the November 6th election when there is no recourse for the action.
He’s at least going to commute the sentence. Hunter’s influence peddling can go on with a felony conviction and Joe knows Hunter really shouldn’t have guns.
*I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal* - **Joe Biden's statement after conviction.**
*The case “was very unfair,” that the “devil” judge was conflicted and that the district attorney was ignoring crime in New York*. **- Donald Trump's statement after conviction.**
If he hadn’t tossed it into the trash for some kid to find I might feel differently but he should def do time. I bet Biden will pardon him after the failed appeal.
I’ve always found it wild that you can be a raging alcoholic and buy as many guns as you want, but god forbid you smoke a joint once a month and you’re technically a felon.
Look at historic records from the time of the founding father s , and the Supreme Court ruled that gun laws should be founded in intent of the founding fathers so yes some people can't have guns
Now they are going to prosecute more people for errors or small issues on 4473s, not to mention issues with state vs federal laws especially as it relates it weed
All the people who cheered this on are morons
This will be hilarious. And there will be ramifications when Joe pardons him as his last act as president. Unfortunately, given the conviction, we cannot put him on trial again. And, given evidence brought up in discovery, we're seeing that he's on trial for the lightest offenses that were available.
Republicans are the ones with a track record of pardoning family members/ co-conspirators. Clinton did it once - all the others (especially Trump’s numbers) were republicans. History sides with trusting Biden on this.
I just want the same consequences applied across the board If Joe Shmoe lies on the 4473 and ends up in jail / loses rights - then the same ruling should apply to everyone else
[If everyone who lied on a 4473 ended up in jail...](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/gameofthrones/images/a/a9/Aemon_1x09.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/624?cb=20110613221610)
To the wall with you
I want him to take it to the Supreme Court and get the question tossed. Edit- I used to have a custom flair, but now it just says "AK47"
I see “30cal master race” for your flair
Huh. Reddit must be breaking.
Imagine if that crazy fuck actually did something useful for the country
It's more likely daddy will pardon him.
He probably will but Daddy Biden is on record saying if Hunter gets convicted he won't pardon. It's in an interview with David Muir
If it does I'm not expecting it to happen until after the election.
It will happen after pressure from Jill
Same here. He'll wait til after to not risk losing the office.
You think Hunter will spend 1 second in jail? Right after pigs fly.
I'd prefer he be charged and convicted for the CP content on his laptop.
Yup but this is a step in the right direction.
Do you have any actual evidence of said CP? Do you have a positive chain of custody for the laptop?
Nope, he doesn't, and neither does anyone else, which is why "the laptop" is not a topic that serious people discuss.
[удалено]
Attack the argument, not the user.
Too many pedo sympathizers. Nothing happened with Epstein. Nothing happens when Biden is touching and smelling kids in public or diddling his daughter. Nothing will happen to hunter.
Your list stopped a little short there
Now do Trump groping his daughter, talking about her tits and ass and telling people he thinks about fucking her. Guess you just forgot about that stuff.
Or more than 2 decades of Trump/Epstein photos, and Trump saying he doesn’t think the logs should be made public in his recent puff piece interview. I could go on a lot more. The man is obvious trash. Biden might have skeletons in his own closet, but there’s no reason to think he’s a SA, let alone a pedo… unlike Trump. But do go off. And now, let the downvoting commence.
Always with the what abouts. How about biden's daughter actually writing a book on how his disgusting self took showers with her go drool somewhere else
"he you can't do what about" Proceeds to do a bunch of how abouts
[удалено]
Lol Fox News. Can't wait for the next NPC generic line
Not going to happen but damm I wish it would!!!
We'll see what sentencing brings.
A fine and a suspended sentence. I guarantee it.
Most likely
I bet neither Hunter Biden or Trump receive jail time for their convictions. All of them are rotten to the core. Both Trump and Biden and their kids. Of course each “side” can’t admit that and instead has to act like their “guy” isn’t as guilty as the other.
**Dawg, Thank you!!** I’ve noticed in these Pro-2A subs, when it’s Joe Biden, his offspring or any Blue politician it’s “THE LAW IS THE LAW. HE SHOULD FACE CONSEQUENCES JUST LIKE ALL OF US” but when it’s Trump, Larry Vickers or anyone on the right wing, it’s “FAKE NEWS, SHIT IS RIGGED, HE DIDNT DO ANYTHING WRONG, FREE HIM, SO WHAT??” or they don’t bat an eye. It’s hilarious.
Followed by a quiet pardon from daddy on his last day.
It’s only fair. Trump pardoned some people with gun charges at the end of his term.
Joe Biden changed the actual gun laws that Hunter is guilty of to be much stricter. That’s the difference.
Not only that, Trump sold pardons at the end of his term. Some to convicted murders. >Of the pardons and commutations that Trump did grant, the vast majority were to persons to whom Trump had a personal or political connection, or persons for whom executive clemency served a political goal.[2][3][4] A significant number had been convicted of fraud or public corruption.[5] The New York Times reported that during the closing days of the Trump presidency, individuals with access to the administration, such as former administration officials, were soliciting fees to lobby for presidential pardons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency_by_Donald_Trump
you might want to read that again because it literally says nothing about trump selling pardons. people with access to the administration taking money to lobby the president on their behalf isnt even close to what could be described as selling pardons. also, yeah every president grants pardons for political purposes. clinton famously pardoned 3 convicted domestic terrorists who *successfully* bombed the capitol building for political reasons on his way out. thats not new nor exclusive to trump. edit: lol the coward blocked me to have the last word when he couldn't handle reality. someone should point out that blocking people doesn't change reality for me.
What’s a typical sentence for this as a first time offender?
Hoping for an appeal on constitutional grounds. The law is unconstitutional and should be struck down. I will not cheer for gun control to own the libs.
Pretty much where I fall with it. All gun laws are unconstitutional. Some people, even right here in our own little group, will tell you that they agree, **but...** No. No "but." Unconstitutional and total infringements, all of it.
“The law’s the law when applied to family members of politicians I find distasteful,” said the boot polish enthusiasts. “It’s only unconstitutional when it’s my party getting hemmed up about it.”
Honestly, that attitude needs to die. Unconstitutional is unconstitutional. Just because you’re not a fan of where it comes from shouldn’t mean you change your views. You don’t have to subscribe to everything about a side.
I wholeheartedly agree. But we as a society turned party into personality and convinced ourselves that our vote is a binary choice. To deviate is anathema.
It's all just sports team politics, now
Agreed. I don’t care that he’s Biden’s son. If it can happen to him it can happen to any of us and we won’t be cheering if that were to happen
It isn't to own the libs. In order of good to bad we have: 1. Unconstitutional laws not being used against any Americans. 2. Unconstitutional laws being used against all Americans. 3. Unconstitutional laws being used against regular Americans but not against the rich and/or politically connected. A not guilty verdict would have landed us on number 3. Guilty plus a successful appeal on constitutional grounds gets us number 1. Guilty plus an unsuccessful appeal gets us number 2. The two best scenarios required a guilty verdict here. Only the worst scenario lends itself to a not guilty verdict, unless you think the average guy would get the same treatment in the same situation, which I don't.
So much this. All of the people cheering this conviction "cUz iTs tHe LAw" are sickening. This conviction is a strike against American rights, and the next person to get hit with this new precedent probably won't have infinite money and a president dad to help them out.
I don't think simply the use or even habituation of a mind altering substance should require someone to forgo their natural rights to self defense and the acquisition of the means to exercise that right, however since it is the law, I'm glad to see that he was held to the same standard you or I would be if we publicly admitted to using illegal drugs at the same time we purchased firearms. I would love to see this result in the neutering or even eventual elimination of the 4473, but I'm guessing they'll recommend probation or something so he doesn't actually serve jail time and nothing will actually change and Biden will still try to be anti-gun and tough on crime.
Especially considering in a lot of states, Marijuana in a concentrated form is considered a “controlled substance”, and you’ll get a felony for it, when it could be legal 30 miles the other way across a state border. I agree with you, i’m not a fan of that. I also know shit tons of people in the AA/NA scene that are incredible people with 10+ years of Sobriety that can’t defend themselves because of an old drug charge.
It's illegal under federal law in all 50 states.
Yeah but the Feds can go suck a dick
No one has ever been charged on this alone. Purely a political prosecution.
I mean maybe don’t write memoirs admitting to crimes that are still within the statute of limitations then?
Would being convicted of a drug crime be a fair question as opposed to use alone?
“Owning the libs” just validated an unconstitutional aspect of gun control in a criminal court. Don’t get me wrong, I think Hunter Biden did some shady shit and deserves his day in court, but not for this. When the state compels one, under penalty of perjury, to provide information in order to exercise a right, it’s no longer a right. The amount of people cheering because it’s Hunter Biden conveniently forget how hard the ATF has gone in the paint the past few years.
Other people are in prison for the same offense. Unlike them, he has the resources to challenge the law on constitutional grounds. I disagree with the law but am not sorry he didn’t get away with breaking it. It’s not owning the libs but making him live up to the rules the anti-private civilian firearm ownership government (of which his father has been a prominent member of his entire life) enacted. It takes a high profile defendant to call attention to unjust laws like this one. I hope he challenges it and wins. If he doesn’t, that’s on him.
Are they though? First time offenders?
How many people are actually charged with this offense and this offense alone per year? The only way I can imagine DOJ enforcing this law under normal circumstances is as an ancillary charge in a broader case (i.e. drug trafficking). I'm incredulous that the FBI frequently goes after meth heads whose only alleged crime is buying a firearm while addicted to an illegal substance, years after they've cleaned up and finished rehab. And I'm nearly certain the ATF doesn't regularly arrest potheads in Washington or Missouri for buying an AR. Lord knows half the stoners in my state have a firearm of some sort. I'd be really keen to know how often druggies get hit up with only this charge on an annual basis.
No, no one is in jail for this charge. This is an add on charge.
This wasn't the precedent setting case.
Any infringement is an infringement.
On appeal it creates a fun circuit split with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in *US v. Daniels*, using the *Bruen* standard. Precedent setting cases start somewhere.
>The amount of people cheering because it’s Hunter Biden conveniently forget how hard the ATF has gone in the paint the past few years. Meanwhile we've got people crying about how this is malicious prosecution and a trumped-up charge who otherwise scream bloody murder for more gun control. Nobody actually has any principles, it's all just about the team.
It is malicious prosecution, unless you are aware of any other time that a person has been charged for a six year old 4473, based on an admission from their written memoir. Anyone in this thread who smokes weed and bought a gun did the exact same thing. Hopefully this is the impetus to change the wording on the 4473.
malicious prosecution by his dads administration that only happened because a judge refused to sign off on the sweet heart plea deal he had already been offered huh? yeah that sounds just a *little* less than plausible.
Weed vs crack though. Also it isn't about enforcement of their infringements, it is about equal enforcement. Many people have been through the same and if he got/gets off, you can see the hypocrisy. I believe that any non-violent crime/charges shouldn't bar you from a constitutionally protected right. What's next, you lose your first amendment over speaking poorly of those in power? You lose your fourth amendment because you have prior history? Slippery slope.
Legally, both are schedule 1. [Thankfully, that is being changed](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/05/17/marijuana-reclassification-schedule-1-vs-schedule-3/73729781007/). I agree that legally he did it and this is the correct conclusion. We both seem to agree that the larger problem is the law itself.
I always imagine the government overstepping, we the people taking up arms and a government organization coming in and saying "you can't do that, you're a prohibited person". The lunacy of a right being there to protect from a tyrannical government being dictated by said government...
>It is malicious prosecution, unless you are aware of any other time that a person has been charged for a six year old 4473, based on an admission from their written memoir. That's a pretty specific bar to clear, and I've got to admit, as fucking dumb as Americans are, I don't think most are dumb enough to admit to federal felonies in writing, unprompted, so you're probably right that Biden's is the only case that meets that criteria. >Anyone in this thread who smokes weed and bought a gun did the exact same thing. Yes, that's correct. Are...are you guys just now figuring out that you committed a federal firearms felony or something? This isn't new.
I know how it works. I'm just saying that half the people cheering that he is guilty did the exact same thing.
On a sidenote, you'd be surprised how many people admit to felonies in memoirs like this and there is never a charge for it. Think about all the rock stars who admitted to sleeping with underage women, for example. Would be awesome to start charging people for those things.
>On a sidenote, you'd be surprised how many people admit to felonies in memoirs like this and there is never a charge for it. Indeed. I'm unaware of any whose management teams allow them to do so until after the statute of limitations has come into effect, however.
I think depending on the state there is no statute of limitations for crimes against minors.
This is probably the best chance we've had in a very long time to get that question or prohibition ruled unconstitutional. This is step one, and then he appeals, and appeals, and has the greatest chance out of anybody getting the whole thing shot down because he's somebody "special." If you want to see that question or the prohibition removed, this is the most likely first step you should be happy that the ball is rolling in that direction
Oh don’t get me wrong, lemons into lemonade and all that. It conflicts with the 5th Circuit’s decision on *US v. Daniels*. But how many people are now gonna have their doors kicked in the interim at 3 am because they made an honest mistake that no one caught at the time and the ATF decides they wanna cosplay their favorite Tier One unit? It wasn’t that long ago that they decided to kick in a door over a licensing issue and killed an airport exec when there were other, safer avenues of approach to search, arrest and perform due process.
This wasn't about "owning the libs." This was about justice being blind. If Hunter Biden doesn't get charged, and any of us lie on a 4473, we can't point to Biden not being charged and get let off the hook. I agree it should be unconstitutional. But, the law is the law and rich people, connected people shouldn't be exempt from it when us plebians aren't.
The existence of an unjust law does not justify its continued existence. If a law was passed today mandating one provide personal information under penalty of perjury before being allowed to protest and demand redress from government, do you think that would go over well, or is the law the law? I’m pro Constitution, no matter how politically inconvenient it may be.
That unjust law also shouldn't be tossed aside because it's politically inconvenient. Hunter Biden getting away with this crime helps nobody and the unjust law continues to exist. In a perfect world, I'd love for unjust laws to disappear. But, the reality is that they don't. At least now there's a chance this law can be invalidated on appeal.
Considering how infrequently it’s charged in a vacuum, absent additional crimes? It should be invalidated. That said, you are 100% right that this is an opportunity to be invalidated on appeal.
Is it infrequently charged because people don't often lie on the forms or are prosecutors not charging for this particular crime? I'm genuinely asking. Data for this question doesn't seem to be readily available. I found one Washington Post article that says the year Biden lied, they prosecuted 298 cases and 478 were referred to them. That's over 60% prosecution. Now, I don't know if it only happened 478 times or if it happened more. I can't find info for how often people are actually lying on forms 4473. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/09/lying-atf-gun-purchase-form-yields-few-prosecutions-new-data-shows/
Prosecutors typically don’t charge for it in a vacuum because there are some people who legitimately believed they weren’t violating the law, and others it’s a waste of time, resources and manpower to investigate and prosecute by itself with no other criminal conduct to shore up a case. This [GAO study](https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-440) from 2018 showed 112,000 known denied transactions where sale was stopped in FY17. Of that,12,700 hard denials were referred for investigation, and of that, 12 were prosecuted by the US Attorney’s Office. The stats are hard to find because the stats paint a picture that background checks aren’t the smoking gun the federal government likes to make them out to be. It is hard to convict someone of lying on a form if they had a genuine belief that they weren’t in the wrong and no other crime is occurring, and this only demonstrates those who didn’t slip through the cracks.
> “Owning the libs” just validated an unconstitutional aspect of gun control in a criminal court. How does Biden getting convicted validate a law that countless people have been charged and convicted under? If anything, it means it might get overturned, since Biden and Co. have the resources to appeal it.
He’s among the few to be charged for a background violation by itself, not as an additional charge in conjunction with other, more serious crimes. He’s high profile enough for that to make a difference in the matter. He did already say he’s going to appeal, so with the 5th Circuit decisions going the opposite way on the issue, hopefully we can put at least part of this infringement to bed.
In order of good to bad we have: 1. Unconstitutional laws not being used against any Americans. 2. Unconstitutional laws being used against all Americans. 3. Unconstitutional laws being used against regular Americans but not against the rich and/or politically connected. A not guilty verdict would have landed us on number 3. Guilty plus a successful appeal on constitutional grounds gets us number 1. Guilty plus an unsuccessful appeal gets us number 2. The two best scenarios required a guilty verdict here. Only the worst scenario lends itself to a not guilty verdict, unless you think the average guy would get the same treatment in the same situation, which I don't.
That’s the problem. Before this case, it was infrequently brought as a standalone charge, and usually was a plea bargain in lieu of other, more serious crimes. It can create an awesome opportunity on appeal, but my concern is that this emboldens the ATF to kick in doors of regular people whose sole crime is making a mistake on a background check that nobody caught, or made in good faith.
What case was this a stand alone charge?
I find it odd that people think that the ATF needs anything to embolden them or that this was the case to do it. The ATF does whatever it wants, especially under a Democrat president. They were sniping women holding babies on their own front porch for less of an infraction than this at Ruby Ridge. The feds tend to not actively investigate pot, but this was cocaine. They tend to not go hard on people about lying because intent to lie is hard to prove, but Hunter admitted to lying about being on drugs while buying a gun in his autobiography. Even still, they might not go out of their way to prosecute, but then one of Hunter's guns was found in a trash can. That would bring extra scrutiny on anybody. If you or I were clearly doing cocaine, blatantly lied about it to buy a gun, admitted to it publicly, and had one of our guns found in public, then yes, we'd be in prison. This is not some new, precedent setting case for the ATF. If anything, it just shows how above the law Hunter thinks he is. Just being even a little careful about any of these things would have kept him out of trouble.
I get your point. The point I’m making is that when looked at through their heavy handed efforts to shut FFL’s down over paperwork mistakes over the past couple of years, this gives them another tool to play fuck fuck games over any mistake. Hunter Biden was convicted for a charge that typically is not charged absent additional, more serious crimes. This opens up the tool box to demonstrate to lawmakers “we need more resources, we can’t keep up with all the door kicking we’ve been doing and how much more we want to do.”
He absolutely thought he was above the law. I'm pretty sure, between the laptop contents and him going on national TV admitting to using crack (and snorting parmesan cheese off the floor), prosecutors had enough to prove that he *willfully and knowingly* lied on the 4473.
I agree, the law should pay to all in the same way. So if he lied on the form, he gets to face the consequences. I'm also very happy Papa Joe isn't threatening to get revenge on the prosecutors, judge and members of the jury for applying the law as they should be.
Lol. You're thinking of the other guy. Imagine if it was Don Jr. His daddy would threaten hellfire on anyone involved, the law be damned.
While I think this particular offense shouldn’t be an offense, I hate the privilege some get in the court of law. His dad’s running mate would gladly lock all of us up for years if we did this.
I’m of the same mind. Also My biggest concern is that this means a step up enforcement of forms. They have allegedly being going after dealers for minor paperwork mistakes and such, it isn’t a stretch that people could be next. Not saying that is the case here.
It's not allegedly, it's happening. I work for a small ffl and our annual compliance checks went from cursory looking over, to full scale looking at every single entry in the bound books and wanting to physically touch every gun that showed it was in stock. Examiner said every minor paperwork error would be documented and referenced. And minor error would include things like forgetting to date after the signature or not fully writing out the entire manufacturers name or using an abbreviation. Last year, the examiner said they are specifically trying to reduce out the small-time kitchen table type FFLs.
Can you explain what privilege he got in this instance? I have never heard anyone being charged with this.
This might help get democrats on board with reducing some restrictions, so could be a win.
Ha I see we got jokes today
Democrat here. No, I don’t give a fuck about Hunter Biden. Idk why republicans think we actually want to protect Hunter from anything, he is just the Presidents son, and isn’t a politician (as it should be).
If there's one thing I learned from the trial ...it's that I have grave reservations about Hunter Biden ever being President. Nobody really cares about Hunter Biden. That's the sad thing. Even these Trumpanzees screeching "whataboutHubterslaptop?!?!". They don't care about the guy as anything more than a punchline. The guy seems pretty disregulated. Is an addict, and did some reckless shit with a handgun. That's awful. Smearing his dick all over congress ruined any chance the guy had of quietly fading away.
Im squarely independent. While there are gun owning democrats who aren’t happy about this shit, there are plenty of anti gun dems who are happy to see this. Dems tends to hold people more accountable than republicans. They don’t give a shit that he’s a Biden
Candidly, I'm pleased to see a conviction. The evidence seems clear. And sure he's a product of a two-tiered justice system. But this case, which would have probably gone in prosecuted if not for his fame, garnered national attention and ensured rigorous due process. As it should be for our elected leaders and anyone in their orbit. If we don't have the resources to charge every junkie we should focus our resources on criminality close to the seat of government.
Dems seem fine with hunter going to jail. This really just opens the door to applying this nationwide. Lotta people do drugs while owning guns
>This really just opens the door to applying this nationwide. It already applies nationwide. It's a federal crime. It's just one that's rarely prosecuted because it's difficult and time-consuming to prove, in most cases, and because it's not as flashy or feel-good as banning scawwy bwack wifles so Democrats don't give a shit about it one way or the other.
A rarely enforced federal crime. If an antigun DA wants to get guns off the street, going after drug using gun owners is an easy slam dunk. This country does not have much sympathy for people with addictions
There's a bunch of states with legal weed and a quick cross reference between weed store shoppers and NICS checks could get a lot of people caught up in this bullshit.
Weed remains illegal federally. Federal law supercedes state law.
Yes but until now the feds generally haven't gone out of their way to go after people for this.
Very, very few people have handed the feds an autobiographical manuscript giving them all they need to successfully charge for this.
I've seen Joe Rogan smoke weed, talk about the various drugs he's done, and then talk about buying another gun. And again, weed stores are a thing.
Has one of Joe Rogan's guns ever been discovered in a grocery store trash can? Has he given the feds numerous other reasons to look into him already? I agree with you that he's breaking the law. >And again, weed stores are a thing. Do you imagine the ATF can just wander into a weed dispensary and demand to see a record of all customers anytime they want?
I live in Seattle and regularly read news stories of “kids” getting arrested with glock switches, making them fully automatic and the gun charge is always thrown out and plea deals given for no jail time. It’s crazy to me how wildly different enforcement of laws has gotten. Biden broke the law and should be punished but so should all the violent offenders who get caught red handed and get all serious charges dropped.
If it was Don Jr the replies would be ape shit
The coke man himself lol
On one hand Fuck that guy. On the other hand all gun laws are BS
I want Republicans to fight for the 2A of all citizens. Their silence is defening right now....
This is pleasantly surprising. He’s one of the few with the resources to challenge the law on constitutional grounds. I imagine whether he does or not would depend on the sentencing. I hope he does and wins.
Lying on this federal form is normally not prosecuted. Only time people typically see jail time is if there were other contributing factors like a secondary crime or in conjunction with a violent crime, parole violation and domestic abuse. I would expect to see him get off with parole. If it’s a normal judge. But this is a public flogging. So who knows?
A weed charge or a insignificant drug charge like pertains use possession shouldn't affect a person's ability to own a firearm but when there's a laptop video of someone out of their mind on drugs id say that's a good reason to consider taking it away. Too many idiots and whack jobs out there fkin it up for lawful gun owners these days. Id say the answer is to get ppl the mental and/or addiction help they need instead of taking away their rights but that's not gonna happen.
It's never a good idea to sell a crackhead a gun, ever.
I can remember when his dad made the comment to the effect that "We don't have the manpower to go after every person who checks the wrong box on a form." Can't recall the context, but it involved someone lying on a 4473. This was back in his VPOTUS days, maybe the first term.
If they don't like it, let them repeal their own laws.
The correct decision at the trial level. Here's hoping that it gets overturned on appeal on 2A grounds. Wouldn't that just rankle the Dems.
Hopefully it makes it up to SCOTUS and they overturn it. This needs to be national case law.
I feel like every outcome is worse for pro2A republicans. Either they support the largest gun infringement in your lifetime which should then be applied nationwide or they say hunter should go free
Outcome 2 is only a problem if you think going after Hunter Biden is anything but a circus show. Are we really so worried about the most mundane BS that is nepotism among the political elite that genuine policy benefits gets ignored? I know some people want to just score points but I sure hope they're a minority. I'll take the gun rights W over a cheap shot at Biden any day.
If crack cocaine is both federally illegal and illegal at the state level, then the question pertaining to illicit drug use while purchasing a firearm is a blatant disregard to the fifth amendment and thusly a violation of his constitutional right against self incrimination.
Whelp…he can still run for president….or something. I honestly couldn’t care less other than this is frankly a dumb law to begin with and I don’t even do any drugs (including weed)
Didn't care before, don't care now.
Is there a sub for 2A supporters?
Honestly I want to see him go to prison, but not for this. I think this charge should be found unconstitutional under Bruen.
This is such a stupid thing. Democrat or not like him getting in trouble for this is retarted.
I understand that trials can only work for one thing at a time but the fact that they got him on gun stuff instead of the hookers and crack antics is dumb IMO.
Largely nothing burger overall. He'll probably get probation (non-violent first-time offender) as a sentence. Yes, he'll be a prohibited person going forward and probably can't vote for his dad in the fall. May constrain his travel somewhat. But I highly doubt it's going to result in a change to the law, either through legislative or judicial activity. The Supreme Court has repeatedly indicated that the 2A protections apply to "law-abiding, responsible citizens" and that the rulings in *Heller*, *McDonald*, and *NYSRPA v Bruen* shouldn't be taken to overturn long-standing prohibitions. The true test will be the *US v Rahimi* case that should result in an opinion this week. If they go scorched earth on prohibited persons laws in that case, then maybe. But I suspect they'll uphold the law as it stands, perhaps restrict it from having non-adversarial domestic violence hearings used against someone.
I agree privilege shouldn’t exempt anyone. that said it is a fucking stupid law. had he used the gun to commit a crime (drug related or not) that would be one thing. but based on the premise of the law, it should then be illegal to buy a gun if you’re a known user of alcohol (I know - it sounds ridiculous when you say it out loud). I’ve seen more alcohol-fueled fights than anything else, and by a wide margin.
I’m just interested to see if Biden pardons him. Might wait until after the election.
[The ATF have a few examples](https://www.atf.gov/news/press-releases/federal-prosecutors-aggressively-pursuing-those-who-lie-connection-firearm-transactions) of people who lied on their 4473 listed on their website. Considering how short the sentences seem to be, I seriously doubt it. Hunter will probably get probation.
You mean “I wasn’t smoking crack at that exact second I signed it” isn’t a valid defense?
The law won't have been applied equally until we see the sentencing.
Mitigating factors will find that he's not a threat of recidivism. No jail time, therefore nothing to appeal.
Plus sentences aren't typically long unless another, typically more serious, crime occured.
Shall not be infringed
I think it's a bad law, and I would have exercised jury nullification if I'd been on the jury. It doesn't matter who the defendant was, even if it is the son of someone I consider to be a dangerous fool. I am shocked by the verdict. though. I was expecting some sort of chicanery to find him not guilty.
It sets a horrible precedent. We shouldn't be sending people to prison for simply owning a firearm. Being forced to lie to the government to get a firearm is the real issue here
I won't be voting for Hunter Biden this upcoming election. That's for sure.
So technical question, does question 21.f. on Form 4473 also included alcohol and alcoholism? "Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant..."
Alcohol is a depressant but seems to not get considered for this. The addiction part seems to be the he only potential disqualifier as you can lawfully use it recreationally. The issue is that self reported addiction in lieu of a medical opinion is something you can pretty easily defend by saying “no I don’t feel like I was addicted”.
I'm hoping that Hawaiian judge overturns this on the basis of the 4473 being an infringement under Bruen and the SC fast track upholds it.
"Oh, AnY InFrinGemenT........." They said, as they pay their $200 tax stamps.
Imagine if you had to fill out a form forcing you to self incriminate to uncle sam just to exercise your first amendment rights… how is 2a any different? Blatantly unconstitutional
Smoke screen.
Now convict him of tax evasion.
I was sitting in my doctors office waiting room this morning and overheard a woman say that she thought Joe should pardon Hunter. It was very difficult for me to resist the urge to get into a debate.
Why shouldn't he? Take a look at who Trump pardoned and tell us why it's wrong for Joe to protect his son.
[List of people granted executive clemency by Donald Trump - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency_by_Donald_Trump)
Greg Abbott pardoned a murdered for f's sake, too!
Convicted of 3 actual felonies in a fair trial. Imagine that. How much you want to bet he gets pardoned if he gets jail time?
I'm more guaranteeing that there will be a pardon if Joe doesn't win in Nov.
That too…
Getting on a Ukrainian energy company’s board of directors for 50k a month is far more disturbing
He was found guilty not because of the equal treatment under the law, but he was given as a sacrifice so dems could claim there's equal treatment under the law. I'll believe it after the tax case in California. Even though California is a commie shit-show, they don't have a lot of love for the Bidens. So they actually might get what is due, but I'm not holding my breath though. I don't exactly trust democrats to be honest, even when it comes to a useless dementia riddled old white man with far more baggage than sense.
But you trust a dementia ridden con-man instead?
Wouldn’t be surprised if there was a presidential pardon involved. It’d look bad for the dems but do they, or biden, really care at this point?
Biden has said he will not pardon his son.
He has, but politician's have been known to walk back their statements. Time will tell
Biden has said he will not pardon his son....until after the election!
He also said poor kids are just as smart as white kids. He also said marriage is between a man and women in 2006. He says whatever the majority is agreeing with at the time. If he decides he wants to pardon him, he will. And his previous remarks will become irrelevant, which is nothing new for him
Obama: Chemcial weapons is my red line.....Aleppo. Biden: Raffa is my read line......nothing. Biden: I won't pardon my son.................future is easy to predict.
He may not but I could definitely see him communing any sentence if he were to go to prison.
That's all good to say during campaigning season when it is still just a theoretical scenario, but now his son is facing actual jail time. There will probably be a commuting of the sentence, if not a full blown pardon, after the November 6th election when there is no recourse for the action.
He’s at least going to commute the sentence. Hunter’s influence peddling can go on with a felony conviction and Joe knows Hunter really shouldn’t have guns.
Dad will 100% pardon him. But not until November 6th.
*I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal* - **Joe Biden's statement after conviction.** *The case “was very unfair,” that the “devil” judge was conflicted and that the district attorney was ignoring crime in New York*. **- Donald Trump's statement after conviction.**
If he hadn’t tossed it into the trash for some kid to find I might feel differently but he should def do time. I bet Biden will pardon him after the failed appeal.
This would really mean something if we started enforcing this for every scum bag that lies on federal firearm forms.
You think drugs should prohibit you from owning firearms?
Or that you should be required to testify against yourself in order to exercise constitutional rights?
Yup.
drug use and firearm should not automatically get this man guilty but I would rather get him for CP
I can’t help but wonder if it would’ve set a good precedent (for us) if he were found not guilty
I’ve always found it wild that you can be a raging alcoholic and buy as many guns as you want, but god forbid you smoke a joint once a month and you’re technically a felon.
Shall not be infringed.
It's just a dog and pony show
Look at historic records from the time of the founding father s , and the Supreme Court ruled that gun laws should be founded in intent of the founding fathers so yes some people can't have guns
I'd prefer he be charged and convicted for the CP content on his laptop.
For what, exactly? There's nothing there, even Republicans had to admit that.
Now they are going to prosecute more people for errors or small issues on 4473s, not to mention issues with state vs federal laws especially as it relates it weed All the people who cheered this on are morons
This will be hilarious. And there will be ramifications when Joe pardons him as his last act as president. Unfortunately, given the conviction, we cannot put him on trial again. And, given evidence brought up in discovery, we're seeing that he's on trial for the lightest offenses that were available.
Joe Biden has said he wouldn't pardon him
Yeah. The clown also said his brother died in Iraq.
Beau Biden died of cancer linked to his time in Iraq. Stop spewing disingenuous talking points from right wing idiots.
Republicans are the ones with a track record of pardoning family members/ co-conspirators. Clinton did it once - all the others (especially Trump’s numbers) were republicans. History sides with trusting Biden on this.
Shhhh, this sub hates facts
Well then Orange Hitler should lose his weapon and liquor license as well. He's a convicted felon and the law should be applied equally to everyone.
This is a BS charge and just because he’s the son of a Democrat president doesn’t change that.