The limits of the 2nd Amendment

[Bonasababy]

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'll plead to reduced before things get too far.

It is an interesting case in the sense of what a potential challenge of a conviction would look like though agree with the OP on that.

I have wondered about timing too...theres been testimony from his ex that she took his gun away, ostensibly due to concerns he might use it in his condition. I would think you'd need strong evidence from someone without an ax to grind like his ex that the timing of purchase and drug use overlapped. Then even if he admitted to drug use later he could claim his gun was gone at that point. Doesn't prevent action perhaps but weakens the case.

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

Thank you! I stand corrected. I'm now curious about how many states make it illegal to be high. That concept is laughable in MT. So although I think suspending people's drivers licenses is still the worst criminal law we have on the books from state to state, this one is now up there with one of the dumber laws I've seen. Curious to know how frequently that gets charged there.

Add South Dakota to the list that ingestion is illegal. typically it isn't the sole charge for a person, but used to slap additional charges against an accused

 

[4ohSick]

... just like I'm sure that there are a TON of people with previous felony convictions that have guns.

Unless he surrendered his firearms, the former president is one of them.

 

[bucdoego]

Still no Rahimi ruling, but here is a prediction (or three) for how 2A cases will fair at SCOTUS.


Supreme Court Conference on Thursday; Orders on Monday...

With the NRA v. Ullo matter already being decided, we are now left with three other huge cases which will significantly impact your 2A rights moving forward. Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, discusses all three of them and even gives a prediction on where we think the Court will come down on all of this. So learn more today and arm yourself with education.

Rahim: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/united-states-v-rahimi/
Loper Bright Enterprises: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/loper-bright-enterprises-v-raimondo/
Cargill: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/garland-v-cargill/

 

[Bonasababy]

Unless he surrendered his firearms, the former president is one of them.

I hope someone told him he can't just shoot someone on 5th avenue anymore...

 

[bucdoego]

Here is another for your consideration that you might find useful.

Understanding the Future of Second Amendment Rights: Mark W. Smith’s Predictions ~ VIDEO

Summary of Mark's comments:

Four Categories of Convicted Felons & Gun Rights​

Smith categorizes people affected by these laws into four main groups, each with different implications for gun rights:

1. Non-Violent Offenders: This category includes individuals like Martha Stewart and Donald Trump, who may be convicted of non-violent felonies such as tax evasion or other white-collar crimes. Smith argues that the Supreme Court is unlikely to continue stripping these people of their gun rights, as there is no clear connection between non-violent crimes and the necessity to disarm individuals for public safety. He predicts that non-violent felons will retain their gun rights under future court rulings.
2. Violent Offenders: On the other end of the spectrum are individuals who pose a significant threat due to their violent behavior or potential for violence, including those with serious mental health issues or a history of violent crime. Smith believes the court will uphold restrictions on these individuals, maintaining that public safety concerns justify disarming people who are deemed dangerous to themselves or others.
3. Drug Traffickers: According to Smith, the court will likely treat drug traffickers as inherently violent, similar to how they might view organized crime figures. He points to historical analogies with prohibition-era bootleggers who often resorted to violence to enforce their illegal activities. The logic here is that drug traffickers pose a high risk of violence, which justifies restricting their gun rights.
4. Drug Users: This group presents a more complex issue. Smith acknowledges that the court’s stance on whether simple drug use (without trafficking) should result in the loss of gun rights is less predictable. The comparison to historical regulations on being drunk with firearms suggests that some form of restriction may be applied, but it’s unclear how far-reaching these might be. He notes that this could be a contentious issue, especially given varying state laws and the evolving landscape of drug legalization.

Understanding the Future of Second Amendment Rights: Mark W. Smith’s Predictions ~ VIDEO

Constitutional attorney and Second Amendment advocate Mark W. Smith provided an insightful analysis of the ongoing legal battles over gun rights in the United States.

www.ammoland.com

 

[WC53]

It’s like asking a drunk if he’s drunk. Hell no, I’m fine! Lol

My problem with this mess is I never saw anyone charged with lying on the form that wasn’t a Felon or a straw purchaser for a felon. They are using both ends of the form to support each other. I’m sure its happened, but, paper chasers.

I mean if it was a low stat month, then maybeeee, I understand

 

[Forkyfinder]

Unless he surrendered his firearms, the former president is one of them.

fact check - true.

Donald Trump's gun licence set to be revoked - reports

The former president will be banned from owning a firearm as a convicted criminal, US media says.

www.bbc.com

Think its pretty silly any non-violent offender gets their rights taken away. I bet the supreme court will soon too

 

[noharleyyet]

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.

Like o.j., this will be jury nullification and he walks.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/04/politics/hunter-biden-jury-gun-trial-dg/index.html

 

[bucdoego]

fact check - true.

Donald Trump's gun licence set to be revoked - reports

The former president will be banned from owning a firearm as a convicted criminal, US media says.

www.bbc.com

Think its pretty silly any non-violent offender gets their rights taken away. I bet the supreme court will soon too

Technically, not yet a felon. He becomes a 'felon' with the Judge's sentencing order (scheduled for the 11th). There is a strategy for an appeal to a Federal Court that could be employed that would forestall the official sentencing, so it is still 'wait-and-see'.

 

[bucdoego]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/04/politics/hunter-biden-jury-gun-trial-dg/index.html

Defense rested earlier today, without Hunter's testimony.

 

[noharleyyet]

Defense rested earlier today, without Hunter's testimony.

Yessir....doubtful of jury unanimity for conviction.
.

 

[Bonasababy]

Yessir....doubtful of jury unanimity for conviction.
.

Gotta think his camp is hopeful if they haven't worked a new plea deal by now--unless that's not on the table.

 

[Elky Welky]

fact check - true.

Donald Trump's gun licence set to be revoked - reports

The former president will be banned from owning a firearm as a convicted criminal, US media says.

www.bbc.com

Think its pretty silly any non-violent offender gets their rights taken away. I bet the supreme court will soon too

They can take his hunting rifles away, but a little less than half of America will still vote to give him the nuclear codes; and if the electoral college cards fall right for him again, he'll win.

What a country!

Back to the young Mr. Biden, interesting jury pool. Speculating about what they might do is a fool's errand, but it is very interesting how many of his peers know or have known someone with a substance abuse issue. It says a lot about that part of the world.

 

[4ohSick]

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/11/hunter-biden-trial-verdict-reached-in-gun-case.html

Guilty on all 3 counts.

 

[MTGomer]

Am I overthinking the order of the shopping I do after work?
View attachment 328712
EDIT- never mind, figured it out.
View attachment 328733

Most sober Havre resident.

 

[noharleyyet]

A jury in Wilmington, Del., on Tuesday found Hunter Biden, President Biden’s long-troubled son, guilty of three felony counts of lying on a federal firearms application in 2018, a grievous personal blow to the Biden family as his father enters the final months of a brutal re-election campaign. He could face up to 25 years in prison, but first-time offenders who did not use their weapons to commit a violent crime typically receive no jail time.

Live Updates: Hunter Biden Found Guilty in Gun Case

President Biden’s son was charged with three felony counts tied to a handgun purchase in 2018. He could face up to 25 years in prison and $750,000 in fines.

www.nytimes.com

 

[bucdoego]

They can take his hunting rifles away, but a little less than half of America will still vote to give him the nuclear codes; and if the electoral college cards fall right for him again, he'll win.

What a country!

Back to the young Mr. Biden, interesting jury pool. Speculating about what they might do is a fool's errand, but it is very interesting how many of his peers know or have known someone with a substance abuse issue. It says a lot about that part of the world.

EW,
IMHO, Trump and Biden (Hunter) will both appeal and the Rahimi decision will likely impact both cases. We are still at 'wait-and-see' for both...

 

[seeth07]

I was really hoping he would have been found guilty only on the third possession count. Now the original post and question it posed comes to the forefront.

 

[ismith]

Unless he surrendered his firearms, the former president is one of them.

Looks like Hunter Biden is a felon now, for the wrong crime though.