Wat's Guns-N-Stuff Thread

[TrailerHitch]

Yes he did, but here's the deal. If you are currently taking any number of prescribed drugs your 2nd amendment rights are forfeit under the regulations as now written. That particular question on the 4473 is a form of entrapment. We can agree that Hunter is a pig but even pigs have their rights and get their day in court.

The irony here is that the government has already tried to plea deal the charges away. They DON'T want Hunter to get convicted on that charge and for a myriad of reasons there are thousands of perfectly legal gun owners out there that could be subject to the same charges that don't want him convicted either. Given the ATF's recently runaway over-reach regulation rewrites there are damn good reasons to shut them down now and Hunter's case is a path to doing so. In other words I don't give a fuck about Hunter but I do care about the ramifications of the ATF prevailing on this issue.

It sounds like you are okay with a drug addled user with getting away with lying about ILLEGAL drug use on his background check. Sorry I'm not.

What prescribed drugs would preclude you from owning a gun? Psyche meds?

 

[Chobham]

It sounds like you are okay with a drug addled user with getting away with lying about ILLEGAL drug use on his background check. Sorry I'm not.

What prescribed drugs would preclude you from owning a gun? Psyche meds?

Marijuana, any opioid (prescribed or not), psycho-actives are up in the air but I'll try to research that further.

The point is that people are, or could be, subject to loss of a right based on arbitrary regulations put out by the ATF. That sort of of exclusion is the sole province of congress, not some administrative agency. Congress should act to provide a list of disqualifying drugs. That list too would be subject to legal challenge but only congress can pass law that would subject a citizen to loss of freedom, fines, and loss of rights and THAT is what's at issue. The fact that Hunter Biden is the subject in this case is almost secondary. What's of interest is the political aspect because the administration (Daddy) doesn't want the ATF to win in this case.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Marijuana, any opioid (prescribed or not), psycho-actives are up in the air but I'll try to research that further.

The point is that people are, or could be, subject to loss of a right based on arbitrary regulations put out by the ATF. That sort of of exclusion is the sole province of congress, not some administrative agency. Congress should act to provide a list of disqualifying drugs. That list too would be subject to legal challenge but only congress can pass law that would subject a citizen to loss of freedom, fines, and loss of rights and THAT is what's at issue. The fact that Hunter Biden is the subject in this case is almost secondary. What's of interest is the political aspect because the administration (Daddy) doesn't want the ATF to win in this case.

His usage was illegal drugs. Those gun owner groups should be fighting the legal drug ban of ownership. Not defending a POS like Hunter. You will never convince me defending him is right in any manner and I do not want him as a poster child for protecting my rights. It makes all of us dirty.

 

[Chobham]

His usage was illegal drugs. Those gun owner groups should be fighting the legal drug ban of ownership. Not defending a POS like Hunter. You will never convince me defending him is right in any manner and I do not want him as a poster child for protecting my rights. It makes all of us dirty.

You need a case to make the legal fight. They (the FPC) have already won a case at the district court level in the 5th district. What is needed is another case in another district to force the issue to the SCOTUS.

Don't let your disgust with Hunter cloud your judgement of what's at stake here.

 

[TrailerHitch]

You need a case to make the legal fight. They (the FPC) have already won a case at the district court level in the 5th district. What is needed is another case in another district to force the issue to the SCOTUS.

Don't let your disgust with Hunter cloud your judgement of what's at stake here.

No sorry, using a despicable liar and drug user to defend our gun rights just makes all of us as dirty as him. We have enough trouble with the anti-gun crowd without this absolute horseshit.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Marijuana, any opioid (prescribed or not), psycho-actives are up in the air but I'll try to research that further.

The point is that people are, or could be, subject to loss of a right based on arbitrary regulations put out by the ATF. That sort of of exclusion is the sole province of congress, not some administrative agency. Congress should act to provide a list of disqualifying drugs. That list too would be subject to legal challenge but only congress can pass law that would subject a citizen to loss of freedom, fines, and loss of rights and THAT is what's at issue. The fact that Hunter Biden is the subject in this case is almost secondary. What's of interest is the political aspect because the administration (Daddy) doesn't want the ATF to win in this case.

His usage was illegal drugs. Those gun owner groups should be fighting the legal drug ban of ownership. Not defending a POS like Hunter. You will never convince me defending him is right in any manner and I do not want him as a poster child for protecting my rights. It makes all of us dirty.

You need a case to make the legal fight. They (the FPC) have already won a case at the district court level in the 5th district. What is needed is another case in another district to force the issue to the SCOTUS.

Don't let your disgust with Hunter cloud your judgement of what's at stake here.

No sorry, using a despicable liar and drug user to defend our gun rights just makes all of us as dirty as him. We have enough trouble with the anti-gun crowd without this absolute horseshit.

If your side hadn't made him an issue just to get to his daddy, he wouldn't be an issue for your precious guuuunnnns.

https://media.giphy.com/media/B1Sg7PeaEy47Q9W0v9/giphy.gif

https://media3.giphy.com/media/kHgASjstNjWcYV9GrF/giphy.gif

https://media.tenor.com/EZtOA2gY9VIAAAAd/find-out-fuck-around.gif

https://media.tenor.com/AOPc6YBwT4QAAAAC/mean-girls-letit-out.gif

 

[Wat_Tyler]

https://forum.literotica.com/threads/the-semi-consolidated-leakage-thread.1120947/post-73808044


I posted that 8 years ago for some reason and still find it funny in its ridiculousness.


https://scontent.fric1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/379466549_10218873861036850_6652560632976346193_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=52f669&_nc_ohc=ZMKCHmOvn6gAX8HCy48&_nc_ht=scontent.fric1-1.fna&oh=00_AfD3XKcekcCrOJU3hMgvhh11sq5BerKwtT1QZjvKX5kVaQ&oe=6510F941

 

[VinnyVeritas]

Yes he did, but here's the deal. If you are currently taking any number of prescribed drugs your 2nd amendment rights are forfeit under the regulations as now written. That particular question on the 4473 is a form of entrapment. We can agree that Hunter is a pig but even pigs have their rights and get their day in court.

The irony here is that the government has already tried to plea deal the charges away. They DON'T want Hunter to get convicted on that charge and for a myriad of reasons there are thousands of perfectly legal gun owners out there that could be subject to the same charges that don't want him convicted either. Given the ATF's recently runaway over-reach regulation rewrites there are damn good reasons to shut them down now and Hunter's case is a path to doing so. In other words I don't give a fuck about Hunter but I do care about the ramifications of the ATF prevailing on this issue.

Well stated.

 

[VinnyVeritas]

You need a case to make the legal fight. They (the FPC) have already won a case at the district court level in the 5th district. What is needed is another case in another district to force the issue to the SCOTUS.

Don't let your disgust with Hunter cloud your judgement of what's at stake here.

Indeed.

It's the same mistake we see on full display when distaste of Trump overshadows the accomplishments of Trump.
It takes a full-senile jacketed shotgun-loving Joe Biden to make that starkly clear.
We love gun-banning, so we embrace senility!

 

[Dribble]

Thank God for guns...they keep me safe from Republicans.

 

[VinnyVeritas]

Yeah. I'm sure Republicans are a clear and present danger to you when it comes to violence in all its forms.

Is that something they do after church services?

 

[coati]

His usage was illegal drugs. Those gun owner groups should be fighting the legal drug ban of ownership. Not defending a POS like Hunter. You will never convince me defending him is right in any manner and I do not want him as a poster child for protecting my rights. It makes all of us dirty.

Give me a break with this sanctimoneous partisanship. If illegal drug usage were the main criterion for enforcement of gun bans, a quarter of both major political parties would be banned.

 

[coati]

Yeah. I'm sure Republicans are a clear and present danger to you when it comes to violence in all its forms.

Is that something they do after church services?

Is a Trump rally now considered a church service?

 

[coati]

I swear, Deplorables lack any semblence of humility or self-awareness, and then they camp out on a porn board because their arrogance prevents them from getting laid.

 

[schism666]

the scariest thing about guns is that the dumbest people have the biggest arsenals.

pewpew!

 

[Dribble]

the scariest thing about guns is that the dumbest people have the biggest arsenals.

pewpew!

My Nerf arsenal rivals any super power. Start em young

 

[schism666]

My Nerf arsenal rivals any super power. Start em young

funny. most of the chumps in this thread nerfed their lives.

 

[Dribble]

funny. most of the chumps in this thread nerfed their lives.

Hence my comment.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1LU4sj4oKmo/VMUfMwJ6yDI/AAAAAAAAHps/o2kyJ54B7xw/s1600/tumblr_nhwh9qhDQV1u5vavuo1_1280.jpg

 

[Bray123]

^^^
$4k arsenal
$400 truck
$4 brain

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Armory. Firearms are made in an arsenal and stored in an armory.


And $4M of stealthy cleverness.

 

[Bray123]

Armory. Firearms are made in an arsenal and stored in an armory.


And $4M of stealthy cleverness.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/arsenal
a building where weapons and military equipment are stored:
The army planned to attack enemy arsenals.
a collection of weapons:
The country has agreed to reduce its nuclear arsenal.

You'll be confusing yourself over the definitions of clip and magazine next.

 

[Dribble]

Armory. Firearms are made in an arsenal and stored in an armory.


And $4M of stealthy cleverness.

Dude don't be stupid. Anyone that ever sold or transported drugs can see you are missing 10 inches.

 

[HisArpy]

Well stated.

Actually, the issue isn't the drugs, it's the fact that he took them illicitly then lied about it.

If someone is willing to engage in illegal acts, then lie about it, that should be enough to deny them the ability to purchase a weapon which could be used in furtherance of those illegal acts or even an escalation of the unlawful behavior into more serious criminal offenses.

It's not "drugs" it's crime. The 4473 attempts to get to this point by asking if the person violates the law by engaging in a specific crime. Since the use of a weapon during the commission of a crime is a felony, such a ban would be appropriate even under Bruen's text, history, and tradition test.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/arsenal
a building where weapons and military equipment are stored:
The army planned to attack enemy arsenals.
a collection of weapons:
The country has agreed to reduce its nuclear arsenal.

You'll be confusing yourself over the definitions of clip and magazine next.

T'was something I read in a book decades ago. A picked nit, better left unpicked, perhaps. Pretty clear that clips are for hair and magazines are for reading.