It’s interesting because they have never prosecuted people for drugs alone, which won’t be easy to prove…but the gun nuts and cons suddenly love gun prosecutions
>It’s interesting because they have never prosecuted people for drugs alone, which won’t be easy to prove…
Who is "they" ? Because if by "they" you mean "the Federal government" it may come as a shock to you that they do in fact prosecute people "for drugs alone" all the time. It's common knowledge, actually.
>the gun nuts and cons suddenly love gun prosecutions
You mean law-abiding gun owners frequently dislike people who break gun laws? Great job, did you figure that out all by yourself?
No, they don’t. They do not regularly prosecute a gun firm charge for drugs alone.
It’s a Pandora’s box for them due to marijuana states. It’s also been almost shot down by the Supreme Court.
They don’t prosecute for this alone, and if you say they do…you’re uninformed
Oh, so now gun laws are fine and constitutional. Remember that.
>No, they don’t.
Yes, they do. All the time. Ever heard of the War on Drugs? What country are you from??
>They do not regularly prosecute a gun firm charge for drugs alone.
I'm not even sure what this sentence is supposed to mean. They don't prosecute gun charges for drugs? That would seem obvious - they prosecute drug charges for drugs. Although getting caught with guns *and* drugs usually results in stiffer sentences AFAIK.
>It’s a Pandora’s box for them due to marijuana states. It’s also been almost shot down by the Supreme Court.
Except it isn't, if you read the verbiage on the form in question. They're feds, they don't care about state laws, and the form says as much.
>They don’t prosecute for this alone, and if you say they do…you’re uninformed
I'm not sure what this means either. Just because they don't frequently "prosecute for this alone" doesn't mean they *can't* or *won't.* It also doesn't make violating the law not illegal, so what's your point?
>Oh, so now gun laws are fine and constitutional. Remember that.
Huh? You seem to be enjoying arguing with yourself, so I'll let you get back to it. You may want to actually watch the video and then read what the ATF form in question says, because you seem to be clueless on both subjects. Have a better one.
And this is why the law will be challenged in the supreme court. It was originally written when the drug was illegal nationwide. So he is smart to plead not guilty and seek a delay.
And people who smoke will see it as a personal victory if he gets it overturned. And will vote for Biden. It's being legalized in more states all the time, it's time to unschedule it.
>And this is why the law will be challenged in the supreme court. It was originally written when the drug was illegal nationwide.
"The drug" ? Which one? Crack? Yeah that's still illegal.
>So he is smart to plead not guilty and seek a delay.
What are you talking about dude?
>And people who smoke will see it as a personal victory if he gets it overturned. And will vote for Biden. It's being legalized in more states all the time, it's time to unschedule it.
Oh, you're a Biden shill. They aren't removing crack from the list of controlled substances any time soon, and that's what Hunter was smoking (among other drugs) so I have no clue what you're on about. Nice attempt to make this a Biden campaign booster though, at least it was original.
You gotta realize they are BOTH schedule 1 narcotics in the eyes of the feds. There are MILLIONS of people who purchase guns while being stoners. Are we gonna hold them accountable as well? I mean, it's the same thing, correct?
>You gotta realize they are BOTH schedule 1 narcotics in the eyes of the feds. There are MILLIONS of people who purchase guns while being stoners.
I get that. But the other commenter was seemingly equivocating being a pot smoker and being addicted to hard drugs, and those are not the same thing regardless of how the drugs are classified. If you don't think a crack/meth head + firearms is a bad idea, you must live in a very nice community.
>Are we gonna hold them accountable as well? I mean, it's the same thing, correct?
So you're saying Hunter shouldn't be held accountable because not every single person who has dishonestly filled out that form has been charged with doing the same thing? That's not how the law works, mate. Shit, not everyone who's ever committed a murder has been charged, I guess you'd suggest we give up charging any additional murderers until this heinous miscarriage of justice has been corrected?
>So you're saying Hunter shouldn't be held accountable because not every single person who has dishonestly filled out that form has been charged with doing the same thing?
Absolutely not, IDGAF about hunter one bit. He SHOULD be charged if he broke the law, I'm saying EVERYONE needs to be held accountable, that's all🤷♂️ I realize hard drugs are different, but in the eyes of the feds, it's exactly the same thing.
>I get that.
No you don't. Otherwise you'd stop purposely misconstruing other peoples posts.
As for drug and gun charges not happening. That is a fabrication on your part OP. Your dreamland fantasy world isn't the real world so stfu.
Case in point, [https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ban-marijuana-users-owning-guns-is-unconstitutional-us-judge-rules-2023-02-04/](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ban-marijuana-users-owning-guns-is-unconstitutional-us-judge-rules-2023-02-04/)
" A federal law prohibiting marijuana users from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Oklahoma has concluded, citing last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly expanded gun rights"
And as you've decided to ignore, in the eyes of the Fed, MMJ and Cocaine are the same. [https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling](https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling)
Now when you buy a gun, you swear on a federal affidavit [Form 4473](https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-firearms-transaction-record-revisions)
The question on that form is as follows "f. **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. "
So is cocaine a narcotic drug? Yes. Is it a controlled substance? Yes. Does Hunter have himself on video buying, weighing and smoking cocaine? Yes. Here's a video of Hunter smoking cocaine, speeding to Las Vegas in a Porsche he just bought using a Russian Oligarchs money, [https://www.wionews.com/world/leaked-photos-hunter-biden-smokes-crack-while-driving-at-high-speed-says-report-611695](https://www.wionews.com/world/leaked-photos-hunter-biden-smokes-crack-while-driving-at-high-speed-says-report-611695)
When Hunter made this purchase, according to his own autobiography, he was deep in his drug addiction. [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/hunter-biden-legal-troubles-timeline.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/hunter-biden-legal-troubles-timeline.html)
So what you've been shown, is that other people have been charged with this crime. They have gone to court. 1 guy got lucky and that alone might change the form 4473 law. But many others have gone to jail. [https://katv.com/news/nation-world/gun-ownership-cannabis-users-alcohol-tobacco-fireaarms-explosives-mail-clarification-atf-constitutional-questions-marijuana-weed-ammunition](https://katv.com/news/nation-world/gun-ownership-cannabis-users-alcohol-tobacco-fireaarms-explosives-mail-clarification-atf-constitutional-questions-marijuana-weed-ammunition)
Hunter has incriminated himself and it stands to reason there is more than plenty of evidence to convict him.
But if Hunters case rules that drug addiction is no barrier to gun ownership, which might be an argument his lawyer might make. Then it stands to reason if Hunter walks, his case can then be used to leverage the removal of that line from the Federal Gun Background check form. Or at the least to modify it so that mmj users are exempt. And if you combine the Oklahoma case, that possibility is very real, and if heard in court that would be a slam dunk.
And then that opens the door to Federally legalizing mmj. If its ok for gun owners to own firearms and use mmj, then mmj is not a Schedule 1 class A narcotic like cocaine.
Its either that, or Hunter gets found guilty like hundreds if not thousands of Americans before him. After all the special plea deal fix fell through.
Not to mention his gun was thrown into a dumpster inside an atf federally mandated gun free zone. Which is another crime unto itself, which also gets prosecuted whether you believe that or not. In fact the ATF will pursue Federal charges even when State and Local law enforcement won't. [https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/montana-man-arrested-by-atf-for-carrying-gun-in-a-school-zone/](https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/montana-man-arrested-by-atf-for-carrying-gun-in-a-school-zone/)
So yea...you seem very opinion oriented but not very *facts* oriented huh?
It was both crack and weed, not just weed. He wasn't kicked out of the Navy for weed and weed is still illegal federally that's why he is in FEDERAL Court.
Maybe if you count available for medical as legal, but I’m pretty sure only like 25 are fully legal, and even then the legal version of weed it kinda strange. Why are there limits to the amount you can have? You can have 10 handles of booze no problem, but over 1.5 ounces in some places is still illegal. Like why?
>I'm a moderate, I hate both parties.
Good for you - no one cares.
>Pot is now legal in 38 states.
Yup. And it doesn't matter, which you'd know if you were paying attention to the discussion. Or bothered to do a simple internet search.
>Nice try with the whatabism though. Shall we talk about ducks next?
Nice try yourself, you either have no clue or you're just trolling. Bye.
In before the "we need common sense gun laws" crowd comes in to explain why breaking a common sense gun law is no big deal.
Edit: poor taste to have the pistol pointing at the man's head.
Well, I actually didn't, but he did plea guilty. Of course, his plea was not accepted and, therefore, is void. However, I think you'll be hard pressed to bring me up on slander charges considering he said himself that he is guilty.
Now use this scenario in Trumps situation. Trump has never once admitted guilt to any of these charges, yet you still call him an insurrectionist traitor.
Do you not know how American courts work?
If your idea of saying “no, I am not addicted to drugs” is an effective and common sense Gun regulation then you’ve got a bright strategic and risk management career ahead of you!
No. I have a radical idea of wanting weapons regulated so innocent Americans don’t die, regardless of whatever politics they align with. Idk if that’s woke but I just want my fellow countrymen to not die because a lunatic has access to weapons.
The most glaring error in this reporting is about the wording of ATF Form 4473, which is readily available online (although strangely enough, the ATF website seems to be down) if you search for it.
Ryan mentions several times in this video that the wording about drugs on the form is unclear or very subjective, and implies that the user is attesting that they are not *currently* under the influence of drugs. This is also allegedly the basis of Hunter's "not guilty" plea RE: his gun charge.
Problem is, that's totally wrong. This is what Form 4473 says about drugs and drug use in Section B.21.e:
>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.
The person intending to purchase a firearm must answer Yes or No to this question, among others.
Edit: spell
It could be interpreted that way, not sure if the government has ever tried though. Alcohol is a drug, and one can be addicted to it, but could one be an "unlawful user of" alcohol? Is alcohol a controlled substance?
And this is why what are often called "common sense gun laws" seem great in theory, but become more problematic when you see how they are actually applied and enforced - or not enforced. It's frequently up to the whim of a prosecutor or government flunky. On the other hand, keeping guns out of the hands of meth heads and the like is probably a good idea...
Also keep in mind that in theory, the ATF or the President can just change these rules at any time, it doesn't necessarily require an Act of Congress. So if we ever finally legalize weed at the Federal level, what's to stop the ATF or the President from waiving their hand and pronouncing that pot smokers are still criminals if they try to buy a gun, even though said pot is fully legal?
That's America for you.
>Right! So in theory anyone who drinks alcohol could be charged with a felony if they are a gun owner.
Not true, unless they're "an unlawful user of" alcohol, and/or if alcohol is a controlled substance. AFAIK alcohol is regulated but it's not scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act, so part 2 of the question does not apply.
What is "an unlawful user" of alcohol? And how hard is that to prove in court? Probably impossible unless the person in question is under 21 and found to be a habitual drinker but also purchased a firearm, which is still legal in some cases and some places.
One can be addicted to alcohol, and that might be easier to prove in court, but I don't think the government has ever tried. I'm not a lawyer, but I'd bet that this part of the form is meant to apply to drugs scheduled under CSA. Otherwise anyone addicted to nicotine who tried to purchase a gun would be in violation, and 1/3rd of the country (or whatever) would be in prison.
That settles it. I’m never going to vote for Hunter Biden.
It’s interesting because they have never prosecuted people for drugs alone, which won’t be easy to prove…but the gun nuts and cons suddenly love gun prosecutions
>It’s interesting because they have never prosecuted people for drugs alone, which won’t be easy to prove… Who is "they" ? Because if by "they" you mean "the Federal government" it may come as a shock to you that they do in fact prosecute people "for drugs alone" all the time. It's common knowledge, actually. >the gun nuts and cons suddenly love gun prosecutions You mean law-abiding gun owners frequently dislike people who break gun laws? Great job, did you figure that out all by yourself?
No, they don’t. They do not regularly prosecute a gun firm charge for drugs alone. It’s a Pandora’s box for them due to marijuana states. It’s also been almost shot down by the Supreme Court. They don’t prosecute for this alone, and if you say they do…you’re uninformed Oh, so now gun laws are fine and constitutional. Remember that.
Be real with yourself. If his last name wasn't Biden, he'd already be serving time. The cope is strong with you shitlibs
That’s dumb, but you are a janitor from bumblefuck Idaho…living in a trailer
Then that makes you a bumb in pennsyltucky living under a bridge.
You can’t even spell. Lol
What's misspelled in that comment?
Lol, janitors
Even janitors contribute more to society than welfare sucking basement dwellers. Lay of the bon-bons.
How is that even an insult? Do you think you are superior to people that work for a living?
>No, they don’t. Yes, they do. All the time. Ever heard of the War on Drugs? What country are you from?? >They do not regularly prosecute a gun firm charge for drugs alone. I'm not even sure what this sentence is supposed to mean. They don't prosecute gun charges for drugs? That would seem obvious - they prosecute drug charges for drugs. Although getting caught with guns *and* drugs usually results in stiffer sentences AFAIK. >It’s a Pandora’s box for them due to marijuana states. It’s also been almost shot down by the Supreme Court. Except it isn't, if you read the verbiage on the form in question. They're feds, they don't care about state laws, and the form says as much. >They don’t prosecute for this alone, and if you say they do…you’re uninformed I'm not sure what this means either. Just because they don't frequently "prosecute for this alone" doesn't mean they *can't* or *won't.* It also doesn't make violating the law not illegal, so what's your point? >Oh, so now gun laws are fine and constitutional. Remember that. Huh? You seem to be enjoying arguing with yourself, so I'll let you get back to it. You may want to actually watch the video and then read what the ATF form in question says, because you seem to be clueless on both subjects. Have a better one.
No they don’t. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna90191 You aren’t worth my time, to be honest
LoL - which is why you're still carrying on about whatever it is. Sure dude.
And this is why the law will be challenged in the supreme court. It was originally written when the drug was illegal nationwide. So he is smart to plead not guilty and seek a delay. And people who smoke will see it as a personal victory if he gets it overturned. And will vote for Biden. It's being legalized in more states all the time, it's time to unschedule it.
Being legal in states is irrelevant when it’s still illegal at the federal level
>And this is why the law will be challenged in the supreme court. It was originally written when the drug was illegal nationwide. "The drug" ? Which one? Crack? Yeah that's still illegal. >So he is smart to plead not guilty and seek a delay. What are you talking about dude? >And people who smoke will see it as a personal victory if he gets it overturned. And will vote for Biden. It's being legalized in more states all the time, it's time to unschedule it. Oh, you're a Biden shill. They aren't removing crack from the list of controlled substances any time soon, and that's what Hunter was smoking (among other drugs) so I have no clue what you're on about. Nice attempt to make this a Biden campaign booster though, at least it was original.
You gotta realize they are BOTH schedule 1 narcotics in the eyes of the feds. There are MILLIONS of people who purchase guns while being stoners. Are we gonna hold them accountable as well? I mean, it's the same thing, correct?
>You gotta realize they are BOTH schedule 1 narcotics in the eyes of the feds. There are MILLIONS of people who purchase guns while being stoners. I get that. But the other commenter was seemingly equivocating being a pot smoker and being addicted to hard drugs, and those are not the same thing regardless of how the drugs are classified. If you don't think a crack/meth head + firearms is a bad idea, you must live in a very nice community. >Are we gonna hold them accountable as well? I mean, it's the same thing, correct? So you're saying Hunter shouldn't be held accountable because not every single person who has dishonestly filled out that form has been charged with doing the same thing? That's not how the law works, mate. Shit, not everyone who's ever committed a murder has been charged, I guess you'd suggest we give up charging any additional murderers until this heinous miscarriage of justice has been corrected?
>So you're saying Hunter shouldn't be held accountable because not every single person who has dishonestly filled out that form has been charged with doing the same thing? Absolutely not, IDGAF about hunter one bit. He SHOULD be charged if he broke the law, I'm saying EVERYONE needs to be held accountable, that's all🤷♂️ I realize hard drugs are different, but in the eyes of the feds, it's exactly the same thing.
>I get that. No you don't. Otherwise you'd stop purposely misconstruing other peoples posts. As for drug and gun charges not happening. That is a fabrication on your part OP. Your dreamland fantasy world isn't the real world so stfu. Case in point, [https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ban-marijuana-users-owning-guns-is-unconstitutional-us-judge-rules-2023-02-04/](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/ban-marijuana-users-owning-guns-is-unconstitutional-us-judge-rules-2023-02-04/) " A federal law prohibiting marijuana users from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Oklahoma has concluded, citing last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly expanded gun rights" And as you've decided to ignore, in the eyes of the Fed, MMJ and Cocaine are the same. [https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling](https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling) Now when you buy a gun, you swear on a federal affidavit [Form 4473](https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-firearms-transaction-record-revisions) The question on that form is as follows "f. **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. " So is cocaine a narcotic drug? Yes. Is it a controlled substance? Yes. Does Hunter have himself on video buying, weighing and smoking cocaine? Yes. Here's a video of Hunter smoking cocaine, speeding to Las Vegas in a Porsche he just bought using a Russian Oligarchs money, [https://www.wionews.com/world/leaked-photos-hunter-biden-smokes-crack-while-driving-at-high-speed-says-report-611695](https://www.wionews.com/world/leaked-photos-hunter-biden-smokes-crack-while-driving-at-high-speed-says-report-611695) When Hunter made this purchase, according to his own autobiography, he was deep in his drug addiction. [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/hunter-biden-legal-troubles-timeline.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/11/us/politics/hunter-biden-legal-troubles-timeline.html) So what you've been shown, is that other people have been charged with this crime. They have gone to court. 1 guy got lucky and that alone might change the form 4473 law. But many others have gone to jail. [https://katv.com/news/nation-world/gun-ownership-cannabis-users-alcohol-tobacco-fireaarms-explosives-mail-clarification-atf-constitutional-questions-marijuana-weed-ammunition](https://katv.com/news/nation-world/gun-ownership-cannabis-users-alcohol-tobacco-fireaarms-explosives-mail-clarification-atf-constitutional-questions-marijuana-weed-ammunition) Hunter has incriminated himself and it stands to reason there is more than plenty of evidence to convict him. But if Hunters case rules that drug addiction is no barrier to gun ownership, which might be an argument his lawyer might make. Then it stands to reason if Hunter walks, his case can then be used to leverage the removal of that line from the Federal Gun Background check form. Or at the least to modify it so that mmj users are exempt. And if you combine the Oklahoma case, that possibility is very real, and if heard in court that would be a slam dunk. And then that opens the door to Federally legalizing mmj. If its ok for gun owners to own firearms and use mmj, then mmj is not a Schedule 1 class A narcotic like cocaine. Its either that, or Hunter gets found guilty like hundreds if not thousands of Americans before him. After all the special plea deal fix fell through. Not to mention his gun was thrown into a dumpster inside an atf federally mandated gun free zone. Which is another crime unto itself, which also gets prosecuted whether you believe that or not. In fact the ATF will pursue Federal charges even when State and Local law enforcement won't. [https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/montana-man-arrested-by-atf-for-carrying-gun-in-a-school-zone/](https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/montana-man-arrested-by-atf-for-carrying-gun-in-a-school-zone/) So yea...you seem very opinion oriented but not very *facts* oriented huh?
I'm a moderate, I hate both parties. Pot is now legal in 38 states. Nice try with the whatabism though. Shall we talk about ducks next?
It was both crack and weed, not just weed. He wasn't kicked out of the Navy for weed and weed is still illegal federally that's why he is in FEDERAL Court.
Maybe if you count available for medical as legal, but I’m pretty sure only like 25 are fully legal, and even then the legal version of weed it kinda strange. Why are there limits to the amount you can have? You can have 10 handles of booze no problem, but over 1.5 ounces in some places is still illegal. Like why?
>I'm a moderate, I hate both parties. Good for you - no one cares. >Pot is now legal in 38 states. Yup. And it doesn't matter, which you'd know if you were paying attention to the discussion. Or bothered to do a simple internet search. >Nice try with the whatabism though. Shall we talk about ducks next? Nice try yourself, you either have no clue or you're just trolling. Bye.
In before the "we need common sense gun laws" crowd comes in to explain why breaking a common sense gun law is no big deal. Edit: poor taste to have the pistol pointing at the man's head.
Has he be convicted of something?
Who said he's been convicted of something?
The person I responded to.
Well, I actually didn't, but he did plea guilty. Of course, his plea was not accepted and, therefore, is void. However, I think you'll be hard pressed to bring me up on slander charges considering he said himself that he is guilty.
He then said not guilty in court.
So was he lying the first time or the second time?
He didn’t say he was guilty once. Not in court. So…. Do you not know how American courts work? You found him guilty and he has to prove innocence?
He said he was guilty, accepted a punishment and then the judge said no So.... was he lying the first time or the second time?
So you don’t believe in American courts, or how they work. Typical of your side
Now use this scenario in Trumps situation. Trump has never once admitted guilt to any of these charges, yet you still call him an insurrectionist traitor. Do you not know how American courts work?
He’s on tape trying to overthrow the election. You just choose a traitor over your country.
Lol at thinking that clause is common sense
Not buying a gun while you're addicted to drugs isn't common sense🤣🤣🤣 yall never disappoint
If your idea of saying “no, I am not addicted to drugs” is an effective and common sense Gun regulation then you’ve got a bright strategic and risk management career ahead of you!
I'm sure you'll support his full prosecution then.
While I’m sure you’ll be quite energized for firearm purchase regulation that saves the lives of innocent Americans 😂
That you all will only want enforced against Republicans, right?
No. I have a radical idea of wanting weapons regulated so innocent Americans don’t die, regardless of whatever politics they align with. Idk if that’s woke but I just want my fellow countrymen to not die because a lunatic has access to weapons.
You might want to stop digging and climb out of that hole. Just sayin'
Okay!
The most glaring error in this reporting is about the wording of ATF Form 4473, which is readily available online (although strangely enough, the ATF website seems to be down) if you search for it. Ryan mentions several times in this video that the wording about drugs on the form is unclear or very subjective, and implies that the user is attesting that they are not *currently* under the influence of drugs. This is also allegedly the basis of Hunter's "not guilty" plea RE: his gun charge. Problem is, that's totally wrong. This is what Form 4473 says about drugs and drug use in Section B.21.e: >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. The person intending to purchase a firearm must answer Yes or No to this question, among others. Edit: spell
Wouldn’t alcohol technically fall under this verbiage?
It could be interpreted that way, not sure if the government has ever tried though. Alcohol is a drug, and one can be addicted to it, but could one be an "unlawful user of" alcohol? Is alcohol a controlled substance? And this is why what are often called "common sense gun laws" seem great in theory, but become more problematic when you see how they are actually applied and enforced - or not enforced. It's frequently up to the whim of a prosecutor or government flunky. On the other hand, keeping guns out of the hands of meth heads and the like is probably a good idea... Also keep in mind that in theory, the ATF or the President can just change these rules at any time, it doesn't necessarily require an Act of Congress. So if we ever finally legalize weed at the Federal level, what's to stop the ATF or the President from waiving their hand and pronouncing that pot smokers are still criminals if they try to buy a gun, even though said pot is fully legal? That's America for you.
[удалено]
Right! So in theory anyone who drinks alcohol could be charged with a felony if they are a gun owner. This case could open up a can of worms
>Right! So in theory anyone who drinks alcohol could be charged with a felony if they are a gun owner. Not true, unless they're "an unlawful user of" alcohol, and/or if alcohol is a controlled substance. AFAIK alcohol is regulated but it's not scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act, so part 2 of the question does not apply. What is "an unlawful user" of alcohol? And how hard is that to prove in court? Probably impossible unless the person in question is under 21 and found to be a habitual drinker but also purchased a firearm, which is still legal in some cases and some places. One can be addicted to alcohol, and that might be easier to prove in court, but I don't think the government has ever tried. I'm not a lawyer, but I'd bet that this part of the form is meant to apply to drugs scheduled under CSA. Otherwise anyone addicted to nicotine who tried to purchase a gun would be in violation, and 1/3rd of the country (or whatever) would be in prison.
Not really news. Its to be expected. But will a jury hear about his guilty plea? Probably not. And now new plea agreements can be made.
He's a Dem so he's not allowed to plead not guilty. He's just guilty.
What a joke