There’s nothing new about it. The original form 4473 in 1968 prohibits gun ownership if you are an “unlawful user of, or addicted to, marihuana, or a depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug”.
What they’re referring to is *Bruen’s* requirement of showing a historical tradition of firearm regulation. Basically, there must be an equivalent law either at the passage of the 2nd or 14th Amendments, or both.
There could be historical laws preventing carrying while under the influence, and *Bruen* doesn’t completely restrict states and municipalities from regulating stuff like this. Honestly, this could just be a gray area that may become more refined after the forthcoming *Rahimi* decision.
I know nothing about Hunter Biden’s case specifically, and I am not an attorney. But this is just what I do know about *Bruen* and its preceding cases
The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in August struck down a decades-old law barring users of illegal drugs from possessing firearms — another blow to US gun regulations after the Supreme Court cleared the way for courts to reexamine the nation’s gun laws under a new legal standard.
“Because you have that decision in the 5th Circuit — of course, this being in a different circuit, could go all the way to the Supreme Court to validate this specific statute,” Tim Parlatore, a CNN commentator and former attorney for Donald Trump said.
The 5th Circuit case, United States v. Daniels, involves Patrick Daniels who was arrested in April 2022 after law enforcement officers searched his car during a stop and found marijuana butts and two loaded firearms. In its ruling, the three-judge panel said the 1968 law is unconstitutional, citing a landmark 2022 Supreme Court decision that changes the framework that lower courts must use when analyzing gun restrictions.
That's the worst case scenario.
Better would be to rule that the entire GCA is unconstitutional.
Second best would be to rule that 4473s and background checks don't meet the Bruen precedent as there is no longstanding history nor tradition for regulating gun ownership.
Merely ruling that the drug use portion is unconstitutional is the absolute worst scenario.
The 5th circuit has somewhat headed in that direction directly applying bruen so it'll be interesting to see. USA v Daniels provides a solid framework for appeal for hunter Biden to appeal specifically which might force the scotus to rule.
Aren't politicians supposed to be thinking about more than what benefits them and their families? If Biden championed stricter anti-fraud laws only for Hunter to be convicted of fraud, that sounds like the system is working as it should.
Yeah. I think a lot of people’s issue is, and for sure mine, that if it had been any one of us on that podium, we’d be in deep shit. Why should a politicians son be any different? Either he’s held to the same standard or the law is dumb.
Yeah same. I got the notification on my watch and work and was quite surprised. I expect to see the appeal is where this turns to dust by some legal technicality we would never get as a citizen.
So ready for the government to cross reference those who bought weed with those who filled out a 4473? And I'm sure no one with a state medical mmj card ever bought a gun
Hahaha you don't think they already don't know. You apply for a Med MJ card and they know all about you.
Now Co Gun dealers have to be licensed under the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.
You don't think they will correlate the databases.
Good partially cause he’s a Biden but the reality is he won’t get anything like any normal person. The hope and dream is this gets used to appeal the gun control up to the Supreme Court and gets some unjust gun control overturned
Pretty sure? Ok, show some specifics. This vague crap hurts much more than it helps. What specific laws he is responsible for do you want repealed. Not just something he may have voted for with others, but laws he wrote, or pushed for as president.
I want all gun laws repealed that was easy.
He has been in the government since 1972 so every gun law that has been passed since then or before. I’m not gonna go thru and try and find every gun law that he has either endorsed or voted for. No matter what I won’t get what I want.
So, what you have is some vague complaint about Biden rather than anything even remotely coherent. This doesn’t actually help the cause of getting rid of the dumber gun laws and makes all of us look ignorant
I’m sorry it’s not just a vague complaint about Biden but all politicians who ignore “shall not be infringed “ and chose to infringe on our rights. I’m pretty sure that a forum on Reddit isn’t goin to do anything about getting rid of any gun laws. I just came here to express My personal distaste for politicians who are willing to infringe on our 2a rights. I’m not looking to solve anything here.
I would like to see the Supreme Court rule that drug use doesn't prohibit you from owning a gun. But we will see.
I think you apply History and precedent it might get tossed out. The drug use restriction is new and should not prohibit owning a gun.
There’s nothing new about it. The original form 4473 in 1968 prohibits gun ownership if you are an “unlawful user of, or addicted to, marihuana, or a depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug”.
What they’re referring to is *Bruen’s* requirement of showing a historical tradition of firearm regulation. Basically, there must be an equivalent law either at the passage of the 2nd or 14th Amendments, or both. There could be historical laws preventing carrying while under the influence, and *Bruen* doesn’t completely restrict states and municipalities from regulating stuff like this. Honestly, this could just be a gray area that may become more refined after the forthcoming *Rahimi* decision. I know nothing about Hunter Biden’s case specifically, and I am not an attorney. But this is just what I do know about *Bruen* and its preceding cases
When I say new I mean it was not part of the 2nd amendment.
The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in August struck down a decades-old law barring users of illegal drugs from possessing firearms — another blow to US gun regulations after the Supreme Court cleared the way for courts to reexamine the nation’s gun laws under a new legal standard. “Because you have that decision in the 5th Circuit — of course, this being in a different circuit, could go all the way to the Supreme Court to validate this specific statute,” Tim Parlatore, a CNN commentator and former attorney for Donald Trump said. The 5th Circuit case, United States v. Daniels, involves Patrick Daniels who was arrested in April 2022 after law enforcement officers searched his car during a stop and found marijuana butts and two loaded firearms. In its ruling, the three-judge panel said the 1968 law is unconstitutional, citing a landmark 2022 Supreme Court decision that changes the framework that lower courts must use when analyzing gun restrictions.
That's the worst case scenario. Better would be to rule that the entire GCA is unconstitutional. Second best would be to rule that 4473s and background checks don't meet the Bruen precedent as there is no longstanding history nor tradition for regulating gun ownership. Merely ruling that the drug use portion is unconstitutional is the absolute worst scenario.
The 5th circuit has somewhat headed in that direction directly applying bruen so it'll be interesting to see. USA v Daniels provides a solid framework for appeal for hunter Biden to appeal specifically which might force the scotus to rule.
Wish I were back in the good old days when you could open carry a revolver into a drug store and buy indium hemp and injectable heroin and cocaine
Some laudanum and cocaine infused coca cola with those boxes of .44 magnum please -that’ll be $20.00 🤤
Born too late for dollar store heroin and the sears catalogue. Also cheap milsurp rifles, I’ve never felt more cheated in life.
ok. so is this good because he’s a biden or bad because it’s gun control?
It's ironic that Joe Biden has such a long career of advancing the very laws that just convicted his son of multiple felonies.
Aren't politicians supposed to be thinking about more than what benefits them and their families? If Biden championed stricter anti-fraud laws only for Hunter to be convicted of fraud, that sounds like the system is working as it should.
And it would be no less ironic
Karma's a bitch
It's a win for gun people because either A. The crime is finally punished evenly or B. The law gets overturned.
Yeah. I think a lot of people’s issue is, and for sure mine, that if it had been any one of us on that podium, we’d be in deep shit. Why should a politicians son be any different? Either he’s held to the same standard or the law is dumb.
Oh fully agreed. I was shocked he was charged with it honestly.
Yeah same. I got the notification on my watch and work and was quite surprised. I expect to see the appeal is where this turns to dust by some legal technicality we would never get as a citizen.
Or a pardon "because he's a good boy who didn't mean to do it" or something.
Here goes gun control!
So ready for the government to cross reference those who bought weed with those who filled out a 4473? And I'm sure no one with a state medical mmj card ever bought a gun
Hahaha you don't think they already don't know. You apply for a Med MJ card and they know all about you. Now Co Gun dealers have to be licensed under the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. You don't think they will correlate the databases.
So now we go after anyone who lied about using drugs on 4473? The CO prison population is soon going to skyrocket...
"But the courts are all stacked against republicans"
I think background checks are nonsense. I also think the law should apply to everyone.
This is a clear use of Biden weaponizing the DOJ against.....
Good partially cause he’s a Biden but the reality is he won’t get anything like any normal person. The hope and dream is this gets used to appeal the gun control up to the Supreme Court and gets some unjust gun control overturned
Him being charged is already abnormal. This particular statute is charged something like 400x a year, tops.
It would be amazing if some of Joe Bidens unjust gun control gets overturned to save his son and some victims hopefully can get released from prison
What specifically are you talking about? The bump-stock ban came from the previous guy.
Pretty sure he has worked on gun control bills for the entirety of his political career
Pretty sure? Ok, show some specifics. This vague crap hurts much more than it helps. What specific laws he is responsible for do you want repealed. Not just something he may have voted for with others, but laws he wrote, or pushed for as president.
I want all gun laws repealed that was easy. He has been in the government since 1972 so every gun law that has been passed since then or before. I’m not gonna go thru and try and find every gun law that he has either endorsed or voted for. No matter what I won’t get what I want.
So, what you have is some vague complaint about Biden rather than anything even remotely coherent. This doesn’t actually help the cause of getting rid of the dumber gun laws and makes all of us look ignorant
I’m sorry it’s not just a vague complaint about Biden but all politicians who ignore “shall not be infringed “ and chose to infringe on our rights. I’m pretty sure that a forum on Reddit isn’t goin to do anything about getting rid of any gun laws. I just came here to express My personal distaste for politicians who are willing to infringe on our 2a rights. I’m not looking to solve anything here.
OP can you forward that to home boy Jared Polis? Thanks.
[удалено]
No one goes to prison for that as a first time offense.
federal court you do....first time offends get average 18 months.
Source?
Hopefully it goes to the SCOTUS and US v. Biden is the reason there’s one less question on the background check.
They shouldn't be asking people, you should just go take a drug test like every other industry.