THE ACCURATE RELOADING POLITICAL CRATER

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading  Hop To Forums  The Political Forum    Hunter's team plans to make his weapon charge a 2A defense

Moderators: DRG
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Hunter's team plans to make his weapon charge a 2A defense Login/Join 
Moderator
Picture of jeffeosso
posted
"Hunter Biden possessing an unloaded gun for 11 day [sic] was not a threat to public safety, but a prosecutor, with all the power imaginable, bending to political pressure presents a grave threat to our system of justice," Lowell continued. "We believe these charges are barred by the agreement the prosecutors made with Mr. Biden, the recent rulings by several federal courts that this statute is unconstitutional, and the facts that he did not violate that law, and we plan to demonstrate all of that in court."

God Speed, little crackhead


opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club

Information on Ammoguide about
the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR
What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR.
476AR,
http://www.weaponsmith.com
 
Posts: 40056 | Location: Conroe, TX | Registered: 01 June 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Hunter lied on a federal form when he said he was drug-free at the time that he purchased a Colt revolver in 2018.

The first thing I thought of was, how many Hunter haters have been guilty of the exact same lie? With the number of recreational drug users in this country, there have got to be a ton.

Persons over the age of 12 using illicit drugs in the U.S. is 13%+

50% of people over 12 have used illicit drugs at least once.

https://drugabusestatistics.org/

Americans spend $150 billion annually on illicit drugs. https://www.rand.org/news/press/2019/08/20.html

Do you really believe all those people told the truth on the forms when they purchased firearms?

I don't have a problem with Hunter being indicted. I think we need a lot more indictments. Enforce the laws.
 
Posts: 13919 | Location: Texas | Registered: 10 May 2002Reply With Quote
Moderator

Picture of Mark
posted Hide Post
"Reason" magazine did what I thought was a pretty well rounded and well researched article on this topic:

https://reason.com/2023/09/18/...-the-right-to-trial/


for every hour in front of the computer you should have 3 hours outside
 
Posts: 7777 | Location: Between 2 rivers, Middle USA | Registered: 19 August 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Bivoj
posted Hide Post
It’s a waste of time and resources to prosecute him for something like that
It’s stupid no matter what
Half the country is probably guilty of that, hell, just about half the people I know ( younger ) who hunt smoke weed so technically they could all be prosecuted
So again, it’s stupid


Nothing like standing over your own kill
 
Posts: 617 | Location: Wherever hunting is good and Go Trump | Registered: 17 June 2023Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
This play is happening all across the US in State and Federal Courts.

Every gun charge is reviving this challenge.

Felon in possession
Illegal possession on school property
The user of drugs and purchase
Are the big 3
 
Posts: 12614 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Link to a Reuters article about the recent Federal ruling:

https://www.reuters.com/legal/...rt-rules-2023-08-10/
 
Posts: 3770 | Location: Boulder Colorado | Registered: 27 February 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Another area under pressure is the prohibition on gold under Domestic Violence Order and Assault misdemeanor with Domestic Violence component.
 
Posts: 12614 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by LHeym500:
Another area under pressure is the prohibition on gold under Domestic Violence Order and Assault misdemeanor with Domestic Violence component.


Gold?


TomP

Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when wrong to be put right.

Carl Schurz (1829 - 1906)
 
Posts: 14736 | Location: Moreno Valley CA USA | Registered: 20 November 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Guns
 
Posts: 12614 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
The criminal rights crowd is opening this, frankly.

Why are some civil rights more sacrosanct than others?

If you have a felony conviction, why should your voting rights be restored at a lower bar than others, including gun/self defense?

My position is and has been that while there should be a pathway to get your rights back, it should be all or nothing.

If you can’t be trusted with a gun, or a license to work in certain fields, then maybe you shouldn’t be voting either.

To me none of the bill of rights is less important than another.

If you want to say an incompetent individual should own a gun and vote, let’s have that discussion.

But AFAIC, there is a huge line between felony and lesser charges, and I’ve thought that lesser charge loss of rights was wrong. If they deserve to lose gun rights, they had better be convicted of a felony.
 
Posts: 11195 | Location: Minnesota USA | Registered: 15 June 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
It is trying to find the logical limit to the New York decision.

No Federal Right is absolute. However, we no longer no where the line is, it how to analyze the line.

We did in the aftermath of NcDonald. These cases were relitigated. Justice Scalia’s majority rejected them.

I do you one better. No Supreme Court case has said the Right to Vote is a Fundamental Right requiring Strict Scrutiny.

Now, using the rest established my the Court to determine a Fundamental Right, I would so do.

Most states restoring voting rights is very difficult. Until recently, only the Gov could in KY.

The new expungement process restores both. It is a legislative pardon.
 
Posts: 12614 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
The criminal rights crowd is opening this, frankly.

Why are some civil rights more sacrosanct than others?

If you have a felony conviction, why should your voting rights be restored at a lower bar than others, including gun/self defense?

My position is and has been that while there should be a pathway to get your rights back, it should be all or nothing.

If you can’t be trusted with a gun, or a license to work in certain fields, then maybe you shouldn’t be voting either.

To me none of the bill of rights is less important than another.

If you want to say an incompetent individual should own a gun and vote, let’s have that discussion.

But AFAIC, there is a huge line between felony and lesser charges, and I’ve thought that lesser charge loss of rights was wrong. If they deserve to lose gun rights, they had better be convicted of a felony.


There has always been a pathway to restore gun rights, Congress won't pass a single nickel to fund it.


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 11014 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
And that’s in my mind how it should operate.

You want your civil rights restored, here is the process.

It shouldn’t be a situation for gun rights is this, voting rights is that.

If you don’t feel that just serving your prison time is adequate to restore gun rights, it shouldn’t give voting that way.

I suspect (but don’t know) that part of why the court decided to place gun rights at strict scrutiny was that it is the one right that has been consistently treated as lesser by courts and legislatures.

I’m ok with treating other rights as strict scrutiny as well. If it’s a right, it’s a right, and it should be difficult for government to restrict it.
 
Posts: 11195 | Location: Minnesota USA | Registered: 15 June 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
However, to restrict a right depends on whether the right being restricted. Fully incorporated rights and fundamental rights require a higher level of scrutiny to survive restriction.

Possession of firearms has been held to be a fully incorporated right requiring a higher level of scrutiny then intermediate Scrutiny that allowed these restrictions in the past (Cir Courts) or the prior NY analysis by the S. Ct.
 
Posts: 12614 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading  Hop To Forums  The Political Forum    Hunter's team plans to make his weapon charge a 2A defense

Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia

Since January 8 1998 you are visitor #: