322
Trump Tells Gun Store He’d Like to Buy a Glock, Raising Legal Questions
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
322 points (96.5% liked)
politics
18852 readers
4184 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
18 U.S.C. § 922(d)(1) makes it a federal crime to sell a firearm to a person who is under felony indictment.
And 18 U.S.C. § 922(n) makes it a federal crime for a person under indictment to ship or transport a firearm.
Oh the irony if Trump and Hunter Biden both caught gun charges
But cool part would be if Hunters charge was deemed unconstitutional but Trump’s was upheld.
If Hunter is charged, then Trump should be as well. If Hunter is dropped, then Trump's should be as well.
I thought there was supposed to be a Statute of Limitations issue on the Hunter case, but still....fairs fair.
As I understand it, Hunter didn't answer the question correctly on his gun purchase. Not checking the box on drug use. Though this is against the law, a district court's already deemed it unconstitutional.
Trumps is a straight federal code violation.
Good point. Thanks for the correction.
Different situations completely. Hunter did not accurately fill out a form. Trump is under federal indictment.
Thank Christ this isn't how our legal system works. These are two different cases, and they're not linked in any way.
No that's not how it works. You see, the milquetoast AG Garland has to look non-political by actually being political and not charging Trump, but only charging Hunter Biden.
What chance is that he did it on purpose?
To upset democrats (because the case against Hunter), but also to rile up Republicans that "democrats are taking our guns away".
We never heard about him buying gun, when he could do so legally. He also doesn't give impression like he cares about guns at all.
Zero. He's not that calculating. He's a moron that instinctually manipulates and cons people through his incessant narcissism only in the present.
He’s like a young Anakin Skywalker in The Phantom Menace flying a fighter for the first time. “I‘ll try spinning, that’s a good trick!” Except it’s whatever nonsense his amphetamine fueled brain latched onto most recently. And his base licks it up over and over. The media talks about him like he’s some master manipulator. He’s just a dog chasing a car that keeps catching the car because the fucking car keeps stopping for him to catch it.
Calling him moron is what helped him multiple times get out of responsibility ("he didn't know", "that's how he is", "he shouldn't testify, because he could incriminate himself", like what?).
Even now with the indictments including 91 felonies he is treated so much better than somebody caught with a small bag of weed.
Don't contribute to this.
Being a moron isn't an excuse for crimes, nor is it the reason for a cop-out for the kid gloves he's being handled with. You're flagrantly misattributing his being a moron and the entirety of us calling him such as a reason he's being patted on the head like a child.
He's being coddled in a (misguided, imo) manner to give him absolutely ZERO grounds for a successful appeal in any of his cases. He's being given ALL the legal rope to hang himself with.
He's already openly admitted to Mar-a-Lago crimes from TrophShendral posts and interviews that wouldn't have existed had he already rightfully been behind bars awaiting trial.
I hope you are right. I do want to see him behind bars.
Doesn't matter if it's on purpose. Its the law.
"IT'S THE LAW." says Judge Dredd, as he instantly convicts and sentences the gelatinous orange blob to be executed on the spot. A napalm round should do the trick. There is no reason to drag this out, after all the former reality TV personality was probably the most obvious, unrepentant and insufferable criminals he'd ever had the pleasure of eliminating.
The law only matters if it is enforced, and there are strong pressures to not enforce it, and because large number of people call him moron, this is being used by his people to get him off the hook ("he didn't know" even though that was never a valid excuse, on top of that he can afford lawyers that charge more for the case that we make in our lifetime)
So I guess you wouldn't charge a crime based on what people are saying and their ability to have lawyers? Ever meet a US District Attorney? Because I assure you, they could care less.
You misunderstand me. This is not what I want, but what often happens. This is why selecting AG and DA are important. Trump didn't for charged during presidency, because his people didn't allow it. Even now he is treated with kids glowes.
I'm confused. Did he do either of these?
His campaign said he bought a Glock handgun while in South Carolina, but when it was pointed out that it would be illegal for him to have bought a gun while under federal charges, and to take the gun out of SC, his staff walked back the claim.
How would I know if someone is under felony indictment? If I sell my gun to my neighbour who is under felony indictment without my knowledge can I be sued?
Ever hear the phrase 'Background Check' ?
Stores have to do that. Private sales are a shit show.
Under those laws it doesn't matter. The dealer has to ask the question. If the answer is yes, he can't sell.