550
DOJ are you listening? These are the same charges Hunter is being indicted for
Do certain medications which are are strong as some and worse than many illegal disqualify someone from owning a firearm? Wasn't there pretty wide claims about Trump popping pills which would disqualify him from owning a firearm anyway?
PDF Warning: PERSONS WHO ARE UNLAWFUL USERS OF OR ADDICTED TO ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
It's a question on a federal background check. For people who live in states where scheduled drugs are legal for recreation, it's a grey area. The state wouldn't care, but the feds do.
It's basically boils down to "gotcha" requirements. If you get investigated for federal crimes and also own firearms but live in a state where some scheduled drugs are legal that you use, the fed can still just flag any future checks and charge you with lying on any previous background checks.
I am not a fan of that kind of legal fuckery, especially if a person happens to be charged with a crime they didn't commit and still get investigated.
It's worth noting that this kind of shit never happens and the only reason Hunter is being charged with it is because that's all they could make stick
It happens. It’s just not usually news worthy. Low bar, but still.
In this case the crime would be purchasing a handgun in a state in which you are not a resident.
Handguns can only be purchased in your home state. It's why California's handgun roster is such a big deal. They simply refuse to allow new models of handguns to be sold there regardless of whether or not their features are illegal, and buying them out of state is prohibited.
With long guns, the gun's features must be legal in both the state where the sale is taking place and the state in which the buyer lives. With pistols it's simply illegal to transfer the firearm to someone from out of state.
If I was from Arizona and wanted to give a single-shot 22 plinking pistol to my Dad in Texas, I'd have to sell it to a local firearms dealer, have them transfer it to a Texas dealer, and have my Dad buy it there.
I dunno what state you live in, but the majority of what you stated isn't true in the vast majority of the country.
Ya, I live in a more restricted state and have purchased a handgun from out of state. It goes to a firearm dealer and they transfer it to you after doing whatever background checks your state requires. The gun isn't sold to the dealer, they just hold it while everything clears. I don't know anything about interstate private sales though.
One fun fact though is that you can buy an M1 Garand from the government and they'll ship it to your door. So that's pretty neat.
For an M1 Garand, the requirements are a little different than just getting a background check.
For those who care: https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/eligibility-requirements/
I am currently in Colorado, and person to person firearm transfers are prohibited, unless you have the appropriate license. I bought my Taurus .40 from a friend in South Carolina when I lived in North Carolina. It was perfectly legal without needing an FFL transfer.
Laws get weird in different states like the person above said, but in Colorado you can buy a rifle if you are from out of state but you must be a resident for a pistol.
I haven't read up on any recent law changes about that though. Colorado just implemented a mandatory three day wait after a background check, so there is that.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Hunter is most likely going to walk for good reason. What he was charged with are unconditional laws. If he walks, so will Trump. And that's assuming you can pin Trump with unlawful use first.
DOJ knows they are getting crushed with Hunter. Even 2A orgs offered legal help to him. They know the laws can't be upheld by an honest judge. So why hit Trump with the same charges that they're losing their shit over with Hunter?
load more comments
(2 replies)
It's funny to watch his facade occasionally fall and the curtain to be peeled back, and yet the show just keeps going.
Unlike other politicians, the trail of grifts with him is long, and yet people still keep him going.
I truly don’t get it.
It's the sunk cost fallacy.
It’s also people who brush off inconvenient information because a guy hates all the people they hate and they wish they could have a huge platform to say what he says.
There are multiple things. Part of it is that they never hear of news like this part of it is that "there's no way he did all of that, the fake news/dwu state/globalists are making things up, because they are scared of him. And for the remaining: "yeah, dauber he did it, but democrats are already doing it/would do it if they had a chance".
While Trump remains the frontrunner in the GOP race for the White House, he has also been indicted in four criminal cases this year, and therefore cannot purchase a gun under the law.
A federal judge in texas ruled last year that preventing people under indictment from purchasing firearms was unconstitutional based on the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, just FYI. So I don't think the situation is as cut and dry as it would have been just a couple years ago.
I don't really think it's super worthwhile to spend a bunch of time discussing if and should about those cases here. The larger point is that he apparently tried to lie about his gun cred by pretending to buy a gun. And that of he had, he would have been committing the same crime they got Hunter with.
In other news, Bruen is terrible.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Is he shopping for his final firearm? You know, the pistol that stops him from being taken to jail?
Trump would flee to Russia before he would off himself
Then start a grift to convince true patriots to move there with him.
I’d be okay with this.
What can we, as normal American citizens, be doing to encourage this MAGA migration?
load more comments
(1 replies)
With any luck it’ll be a Secret Service persons duty pistol.
The same Secret Service that conveniently yet 'accidentally' deleted all of their texts from January 5-7 after they were subpoenaed and told to preserve those texts? The same Secret Service where Mike Pence said (like a Criminal Minds victim), "I'm not getting in the car, Tim. I trust you, Tim, but you're not driving the car. If I get in that vehicle, you guys are taking off. I'm not getting in the car."
I wouldn't particularly hold your breath about Trump's Secret Service detail being particularly loyal to the United States.
Trump's SS
The one that will be found in the bunker with Eva Braun?
So a spokesman posts on Twitter that he bought a gun and then someone has to delete the post and say it is not true? Sounds like amateur hour for his campaign but I thought he only hired the "best and brightest".
I thought he only hired the “best and brightest”.
"they're not sending their best"
"And some, I assume, are good people"
Turns out the best and the brightest insist on being paid.
There's more evidence that Trump makes bad hiring decisions than there's evidence for gravity.
I thought he only hired the “best and brightest”.
He hires only the best and brightest he can get. It's a much smaller pool.
Can he try NOT committing any crimes for like one day? Just to see if he can do it?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wait, I'm still catching up. Why would it have been illegal?
He doesn't live in that state.
This is the reason.
He's been indicted on felony charges, felons can't own guns.
He's not a felon (yet). Does that law apply to indictments?
Edit: No, it doesn't:
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/19/second-amendment-texas-case-buy-guns-felony-indictment/
Lying liar says what?
The law only applies to brown people under indictment who want to purchase firearms, not ~~white~~ orange ones.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
550 points (97.1% liked)
News
21721 readers
3573 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS