Jump to content

Hunter “Big Gun In His Pants” Biden - Mastermind of the Biden Family Crime Syndicate

Hanrahan

By Hanrahan
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

VRHorn

VRHorn 718

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that you should start a campaign to lobby legislators on this topic and report back with your notes on how that goes. 

I am confused by your dizzying intellect, so I have a follow-up question for you to not answer directly - is it important that drug users not buy guns? If the form is that important, that's the goal, correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

HenryJames
HenryJames
Loather
Loather

Well boys, it turns out the laptop is real. I realize you liberals are generally dishonest and hypocritical, and will proudly boast that you don't care about any of this, but for that small fraction o

TexArcher
TexArcher

It's amazing how stupid 21st Century Republicans are. Fox News has actually convinced you that this story about a private citizen matters right now.  While an ex-president is being investigated f

Posted Images

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13581

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

g. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?  Warning:  The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.

The federal government mandates as a requirement to hold a commercial drivers license thru which I earn my livelihood I am subject to random drug test. Obviously you would not be against this same standard for gun owners that this section of the law applies to as a means to verify that we enforce the laws on the book, correct?

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VRHorn

VRHorn 718

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, VRHorn said:

Nope, throw the book at him. That said, it seems like the 2A "enforce the existing laws" crew should want drug testing before all gun purchases, which I am sure you are down with, right?

 

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If his last name was anything other than Biden, none of you would have a problem with locking him up and throwing away the key. 

Thursday night drunk anny is best anny.

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29349

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If his last name was anything other than Biden, none of you would have a problem with locking him up and throwing away the key. 

I don’t think any of us have a problem knowing that it is Hunter Biden. I’ve thought he was a piece of shit since he slept with Beau’s widow and I don’t think his name should afford him protection from the law. But he’s getting harsher treatment from the DOJ because of his name, not more lenient treatment. This charge is rarely (if ever) prosecuted on its own. When it is prosecuted it’s in addition to more serious charges.

 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

I don’t think any of us have a problem knowing that it is Hunter Biden. I’ve thought he was a piece of shit since he slept with Beau’s widow and I don’t think his name should afford him protection from the law. But he’s getting harsher treatment from the DOJ because of his name, not more lenient treatment. This charge is rarely (if ever) prosecuted on its own. When it is prosecuted it’s in addition to more serious charges.

And no one should object to this particular federal crime being more consistently prosecuted.

But yeah, this guy is a particular piece of shit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105095

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
If his last name was anything other than Biden, none of you would have a problem with locking him up and throwing away the key. 

Ummmm….most of us don’t have a problem with that - if you think we do, you really, really haven’t been paying attention. If the DOJ wants to enforce the shit outta this law (and the laws on tax evasion that also apparently apply), so be it.
I truly don’t give a single fuck about Hunter Biden. Or Chelsea Clinton. Or the Bush daughters, or Obama’s daughters. I hope they all live nice lives. If they turn into gunslinging crackheads, then so be it, there are consequences. (I do give more of a shit about the Trump kids, BECAUSE HE FUCKING INSTALLED THEM IN HIS ADMINISTRATION. Except for Tiffany and Baron who, yep, I don’t give a shit about).
That’s what the GQP defenders will never, ever understand.
Fuck, if it turns out that Joe Biden took some sort of big fat bribe from Ukraine, laundered through three shell companies, I would want him impeached and convicted.
This “above the law” shit that has turned into the GQP’s cornerstone belief (Trump, Alito, Thomas, Paxton, etc forever) is fucking absurd. I’ve never cried once about a Dem politician busted for crimes and suffering the consequences. Not a single tear. If they do wrong, git em. Git em all.
Wanna discuss THIS particular gun law? I think it shouldn’t cover weed (which I think should be legal across the board), but otherwise…sure. Let’s have it, and enforce it.
  • Hook 'Em 11
  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6938

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Anastasis said:

People who want to enforce laws gun laws should be along shortly to agree with me. I am frankly surprised that you are not one of them. 

I’ve watched too many be murdered while murderers cite  gun laws as a defense for their being being able to do so with impunity

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Wanna discuss THIS particular gun law? I think it shouldn’t cover weed (which I think should be legal across the board), but otherwise…sure. Let’s have it, and enforce it.

Yeah, this is obvious. But see if you say that we should enforce existing gun laws and prosecute offenses, instead of rallying behind that, we have people here suggesting that we do politically unviable things like mandate drug tests for all transactions (with I bet the Republicans would love frankly, and try to extend to other constitutional rights). Just totally non serious rhetoric, which our political system excels at producing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14471

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Ummmm….most of us don’t have a problem with that - if you think we do, you really, really haven’t been paying attention. If the DOJ wants to enforce the shit outta this law (and the laws on tax evasion that also apparently apply), so be it.
I truly don’t give a single fuck about Hunter Biden. Or Chelsea Clinton. Or the Bush daughters, or Obama’s daughters. I hope they all live nice lives. If they turn into gunslinging crackheads, then so be it, there are consequences. (I do give more of a shit about the Trump kids, BECAUSE HE FUCKING INSTALLED THEM IN HIS ADMINISTRATION. Except for Tiffany and Baron who, yep, I don’t give a shit about).
That’s what the GQP defenders will never, ever understand.
Fuck, if it turns out that Joe Biden took some sort of big fat bribe from Ukraine, laundered through three shell companies, I would want him impeached and convicted.
This “above the law” shit that has turned into the GQP’s cornerstone belief (Trump, Alito, Thomas, Paxton, etc forever) is fucking absurd. I’ve never cried once about a Dem politician busted for crimes and suffering the consequences. Not a single tear. If they do wrong, git em. Git em all.
Wanna discuss THIS particular gun law? I think it shouldn’t cover weed (which I think should be legal across the board), but otherwise…sure. Let’s have it, and enforce it.

Surly Motto worthy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19450

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

I can't wait for the SCOTUS decision explaining why actually this is completely in line with gun laws that were in effect at the founding. 

Obviously, they took 4473 very seriously at the Const. Conv.  Little known fact, in 1787, addiction to crack cocaine was a huge epidemic in the newly formed United States.  So much so, it even altered the minds of the framers themselves whilst drafting the nation's blueprint.

"Yo, J-dog.  You high as fuck, aren't you?  Seriously, the third amendment...you want it to be about soldiers living in your house?  We haven't even gotten to personal rights in a court proceeding or state's rights to combat an overbearing federal government.  And you wanna open the Bill of Rights with some shit about dudes eating breakfast in your kitchen? You're on crack again, aren't you."  

Serious question though about the wording of 4437's drug question.  It asks if you're addicted to any depressants?  Last I checked, alcohol is a depressant.  It's not illegal, but neither are most of the drugs that question tacitly refers to.  Not all alcoholics are gun purchasers and not all gun purchasers are alcoholics.  But the Venn Diagram is pretty fucking robust.  I'm guessing that would disqualify, if answered earnestly, probably 50mm+ firearms in this country in an instant with nobody's rights being infringed upon as per the directives of "Responsible Gun Owners" everywhere.  

I like how they inquire about marijuana but not suicidal/homicidal tendencies.  But if he lied, he lied.  Throw the book at him, so we can all remember what it was like that one time America insisted on people in a rough patch in their lives not solve it with buying firearms as a coping mechanism.  Fuck 'em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9818

Posted
Posted

g. Are you an unlawful user of, OR addicted to, marijuana OR any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, OR any other controlled substance?  

 

I am an originist that believes this law must be interpreted strictly as written.  Therfore habitatal coffee drinking gun owners who falsely filled out this form, regardless of their last names, should also be locked up and the key should be thrown away!   Lock them all up!!

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

g. Are you an unlawful user of, OR addicted to, marijuana OR any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, OR any other controlled substance?  

 

I am an originist that believes this law must be interpreted strictly as written.  Therfore habitatal coffee drinking gun owners who falsely filled out this form, regardless of their last names, should also be locked up and the key should be thrown away!   Lock them all up!!

See how dumb this gets. We can’t prosecute crack heads like Hunter Biden for federal firearm law violations because coffee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13581

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

And you guys wonder why y’all can’t muster some common sense gun control legislation. 

After waving the "enforce the existing laws" flag, you literally and predictably dodged my simple yes/no question that directly addressed that as if no one sees your dishonest horseshit. It's no wonder we can't muster some bi-partisan common sense gun control legislation just like it's no wonder we can't muster some bi-partisan health care reform.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotActuallyALonghorn

NotActuallyALonghorn 4976

Posted
Posted

He should probably get convicted since he pretty much admitted to it (And it is notoriously hard to convict someone for lying on a 4473 because it is difficult to prove and not really worth the time to investigate). However, he should appeal it because, frankly, taking away someone's constitutional rights without due process is kind of unconstitutional. Not mention that the law was likely written that way to keep scary black people from being able to own guns. But, wait, there's more! Based on the precedent set forth in Haynes v US, the bit about lying on the form should be thrown out as well, as it requires one to testify against themself in order to purchase a gun. The courts don't even have to reference the second amendment, other than to acknowledge that it is the civil right the defendant was seeking to exercise, in order to strike it down.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

After waving the "enforce the existing laws" flag, you literally and predictably dodged my simple yes/no question that directly addressed that as if no one sees your dishonest horseshit. It's no wonder we can't muster some bi-partisan common sense gun control legislation just like it's no wonder we can't muster some bi-partisan health care reform.

I guess I am sorry that we are not taking about your cdl more. But it’s not really relevant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Longhorn_Fan68

Longhorn_Fan68 33869

Posted
Posted

It's gotta be hard times for those both siders right now. Those who have always been on the side of right don't care which jersey the player is wearing when they break a rule. We want justice to be blind. That's the only way it works. It must be hard when you can't pin a false narrative on us. Terrible even. 

  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6938

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

We should ban coffee drinkers from gun ownership and also nobody should have to actually account for violations of federal gun laws. 
 

And you guys wonder why y’all can’t muster some common sense gun control legislation. 

Well, the Constitution, like the Bible is what it says and what it means. It’s why there’s a Supreme Court and a Magisterium.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

He should probably get convicted since he pretty much admitted to it (And it is notoriously hard to convict someone for lying on a 4473 because it is difficult to prove and not really worth the time to investigate). However, he should appeal it because, frankly, taking away someone's constitutional rights without due process is kind of unconstitutional. Not mention that the law was likely written that way to keep scary black people from being able to own guns. But, wait, there's more! Based on the precedent set forth in Haynes v US, the bit about lying on the form should be thrown out as well, as it requires one to testify against themself in order to purchase a gun. The courts don't even have to reference the second amendment, other than to acknowledge that it is the civil right the defendant was seeking to exercise, in order to strike it down.

Inception level. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19450

Posted
Posted

I really didn’t realize how blanket the drug/Substance question was on that form.  Hunter did lie on it and so he had to face the consequences.  But if that were followed through on, tens of millions of guns and their owners would be SOL.  I didn’t even fill it out and fondren and main says I’m mentally unhinged.  
 

maybe I’m some bizarre way Hunter doing a few years inside will get the nation to finally acknowledge the rot in our gun sales culture.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fattyflattie

fattyflattie 4639

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

It's gotta be hard times for those both siders right now. Those who have always been on the side of right don't care which jersey the player is wearing when they break a rule. We want justice to be blind. That's the only way it works. It must be hard when you can't pin a false narrative on us. Terrible even. 

Maningreenshirtlaughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9818

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

See how dumb this gets. We can’t prosecute crack heads like Hunter Biden for federal firearm law violations because coffee. 

Yea you’re right.  Originalism is dumb and leads to ridiculous conclusions.  It's almost like laws should be interpreted with some type of context, "reasonability standard", and consistency with how it's been applied in the past.

And by the way I agreed with you.  Convict Hunter Biden tor Federal firearms law violation if he is guilty.  Throw the book at him even.  Now convict and apply the same standards to everyone else that did the same thing.  Both sides!

Edited by Horn Dog
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14471

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Naaah, fuck that.  I'm going all in on hypocrisy like the other dudes.

For the record, the quote is attributed to me, but the statement is from Brisket's post.

Edited by dcbc
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14918

Posted
Posted

Ummmm….most of us don’t have a problem with that - if you think we do, you really, really haven’t been paying attention. If the DOJ wants to enforce the shit outta this law (and the laws on tax evasion that also apparently apply), so be it.
I truly don’t give a single fuck about Hunter Biden. Or Chelsea Clinton. Or the Bush daughters, or Obama’s daughters. I hope they all live nice lives. If they turn into gunslinging crackheads, then so be it, there are consequences. (I do give more of a shit about the Trump kids, BECAUSE HE FUCKING INSTALLED THEM IN HIS ADMINISTRATION. Except for Tiffany and Baron who, yep, I don’t give a shit about).
That’s what the GQP defenders will never, ever understand.
Fuck, if it turns out that Joe Biden took some sort of big fat bribe from Ukraine, laundered through three shell companies, I would want him impeached and convicted.
This “above the law” shit that has turned into the GQP’s cornerstone belief (Trump, Alito, Thomas, Paxton, etc forever) is fucking absurd. I’ve never cried once about a Dem politician busted for crimes and suffering the consequences. Not a single tear. If they do wrong, git em. Git em all.
Wanna discuss THIS particular gun law? I think it shouldn’t cover weed (which I think should be legal across the board), but otherwise…sure. Let’s have it, and enforce it.

Did you think that impeaching Clinton for lying about a beej made sense?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105095

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Buzzrock said:


Did you think that impeaching Clinton for lying about a beej made sense?

I did.   And do.  But recall, I'm a lawyer.  And perjury is a pet-fucking-peeve of mine.  As I've said here before, "The rule of law" is functionally an honor system.  If you opt out of it (lying under oath is doing just that), then things get precarious.

Do I think it was as serious as what DOTARD did?  Of course not.  But, hey...presidents, past, present, and future....DON'T CRIME.  IF YOU WERE THINKING OF CRIMING, DON'T.  Apparently, that's WAY too high a standard in modern America, but fuck it, it's my standard.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105095

Posted
Posted
Just now, Buzzrock said:

I appreciate your idealism but they are all crooks. To one extent or another.

I don't care about crookery (shit, my old S. Texas ranching grandfather used to say "look, you gotta give em all reasonable stealing privileges, that's just how it is").  Cash in with big dollar "speaking fees" after your time in office?  Whatever, we can't stop it all.

Just don't obviously and openly crime will in office.  That's my standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

Yea you’re right.  Originalism is dumb and leads to ridiculous conclusions.  It's almost like laws should be interpreted with some type of context, "reasonability standard", and consistency with how it's been applied in the past.

If you are going to make an argument about originalism, perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the text of the actual law. 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

(d)It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person, including as a juvenile—
...
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoladu

yoladu 4093

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Anastasis said:

We should ban coffee drinkers from gun ownership and also nobody should have to actually account for violations of federal gun laws. 
 

And you guys wonder why y’all can’t muster some common sense gun control legislation. 

uhh, isn't the point being made with the ridiculous suggestions above is that the existing gun law in question is void of common sense?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, yoladu said:

uhh, isn't the point being made with the ridiculous suggestions above is that the existing gun law in question is void of common sense?

I am not sure that common sense has anything to do with the point being made. Coffee is not a controlled substance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19450

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, yoladu said:

someone tell me with a straight face that this motherfucker didn't lie on his 4473 as well.

 

I don't want to "what-aboutism", but this is a fair point.  Don, Jr. is an avid sportsman and owns many firearms.  And Hunter Biden is an avid cracksman.  

But now that I read that form, I realized that not only do I personally know Don, Jr. is deeply addicted to powder cocaine.  But I watched him do comical amounts of it in Austin a few years back before going hunting the next day.  And he was not 12 hours 'bottle to throttle.'  On the amount he was on, he was probably up until 4am and was on the lease in the Hill Country armed to the chattering teeth by 6am.  

I'll leave to Anastasis and others to explain how the depressant, alcohol, gets a pass on that form?  I don't want crackheads and opiate addicts anywhere near guns.  But I don't get the other depressant or abuse of legalized prescription drugs workaround?  

Edited by YGIFS
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9818

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Why enforce the law when it comes to lying on a 4473? Is this real life?

 

g. Are you a unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?  Warning:  The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.

 

 

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If you are going to make an argument about originalism, perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the text of the actual law. 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

(d)It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person, including as a juvenile—
...
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

Just so I got this right.. I quote your previous post stating the actual text of the federal law, point out how the extensive use of "OR" in the actual text of this law, by a  strict interpretation of the written words can be used to reach a ridiculous conclusion, and your response is that I should familiarize myself with the actual written law?  Is that correct? 

And yes coffee is not a controlled substance,  but you are aware what 'OR' means.  Right?

Edited by Horn Dog
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...