Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping System

The limits of the 2nd Amendment

Elky Welky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2021
Messages
754
Location
Montana
Hunter Biden’s trial is interesting. To those not following, he was addicted to crack cocaine for a period of his life, and the prosecution is claiming that he lied on the ATF form when he declared that he did not use illegal drugs.

To my knowledge, he wasn’t convicted of possession or any other drug related crime at the time of the purchase.

Which leads to my question: if someone isn’t a convicted felon, but also uses illegal drugs, should they still have the right to keep and bear arms?

A reminder: marijuana also, for the purposes of that form, has been considered an illegal drug, even though it is legal in many states.

Should Mr. Biden be convicted, there would be grounds for a 2nd amendment challenge to this language on the form. Of course, those that are politically motivated won’t like the name attached to this case, but the 2nd amendment piece still strikes me as noteworthy and perhaps even precedent setting in the future, should he challenge the (what I believe to be inevitable) conviction for this crime.

Interested in the thoughts of the HT crowd.
 
Legally speaking, I guess I have a few questions.

The form question is: "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 question implies currently, at the time of answering, being considered a user correct? So even if you had used a drug the week before, you can truthfully answer no correct?

Is the question on here due to the result of the unlawful use resulting in a felony charge or because it is dangerous for a person using a drug to own a firearm? Why then isn't alcohol included as a similar question?
 
The question implies currently, at the time of answering, being considered a user correct? So even if you had used a drug the week before, you can truthfully answer no correct?
I would think the wording would be "are you under the influence of..." rather than "are you a user of..." if it was asking if you're currently high, but that's a good question. Has there been any official clarification of what that question is asking?
 
I would think the wording would be "are you under the influence of..." rather than "are you a user of..." if it was asking if you're currently high, but that's a good question. Has there been any official clarification of what that question is asking?
I didn't even think of that actually. I was more thinking of what is the defined amount of time for "are you a user of"? If my last joint was a day ago, am I a user of? How about a week ago? A month ago? A year? 10 years ago?
 
Form 4473, question 11e

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?’

What was his answer when he bought the gun?
 
Form 4473, question 11e

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?’

What was his answer when he bought the gun?
Gonna go out on a limb and say he answered no. Since they sold it to him and theres a charge/court and all.
 
Form 4473, question 11e

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?’

What was his answer when he bought the gun?
He answered no, even though there is substantial evidence that he was addicted to a controlled substance. This is why he will likely be convicted.

But that's not my question... my question is broader: should someone who has not been convicted of any felony be denied their second amendment rights? That's the question I would expect to come up on appeal.
 
He answered no, even though there is substantial evidence that he was addicted to a controlled substance. This is why he will likely be convicted.

But that's not my question... my question is broader: should someone who has not been convicted of any felony be denied their second amendment rights? That's the question I would expect to come up on appeal.
If they haven't been convicted of a felony my opinion is they shouldn't be denied the ability to buy and bear guns. I am not saying being a felon is the end all answer of whether a person should be able to do so though.

I'm more curious on the drug question though. Is there actually people out there that want to buy a gun (obviously they do if they are filling out this form) and answer "Yes" that they are an "user", fully knowing it will stop them from being able to buy said gun?
 
Would you like to make a bet? I'd like a chance to make back that money I spent on the forked horn raffle ticket.
Oh I know better than to bet on jury trials. I've been on both sides and seen far too many slam dunk cases walk free and questionable prosecutions get unanimous convictions.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,667
Messages
2,028,908
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474
Back
Top