• ImFresh3x
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hunter Biden “provided a written statement on Form 4473 certifying he was not an unlawful user of, and addicted to, any stimulant, narcotic drug, and any other controlled substance, when in fact, as he knew, that statement was false and fictitious,” according to the indictment.

      So he lied on a form about not being a drug user.

      • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Good to know that Republicans will be champing at the bit to take more guns away and give this enforcement some teeth.

        Let’s drug test Congress.

      • IzzyScissor@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Something which, notably, happens on around 1% of all applications, but is prosecuted less than 0.000005% of the time.

        From 2008 - 2012 there were 32 million background checks, and 373,900 rejections.

        Between FY 2008 and FY 2015, an 8-year period, ATF formally referred 509 NICS denial
        cases that included 558 subjects to USAOs for possible prosecution. The USAOs
        accepted for consideration of prosecution 254 subjects (or less than 32 subjects per
        year) and declined to prosecute 272 subjects.

        32 prosecutions a year for an average of 6 million background checks (completed, there is a much larger number for bg checks initiated)

      • geosoco@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        huh? I’m guessing you didn’t mean to reply to me.

        I was asking why the OP changed the title of the article to add “son of the president”. As if it’d somehow make people care more about this total non-story.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it is a huge story. Hunter has money, so his attorneys can move the case up the chain. The court may have to rule if it is constitutional or unconstitutional for a government form to restrict gun sales to people. Hunter walks on that charge if deemed unconstitutional, and if deemed constitutional, it could maybe set precedent that the government can legally enforce stricter gun regulations.

          E.g. No assault charges in the last x amount of years unless deemed okay by a medical professional. No firearms over a certain caliber, etc.

          So for the trump appointee to win, he has to do what is good for the populous, which he can’t do. It’s against his programming. Who knows though, maybe the clock will be right at that time of day?

          • geosoco@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I hear you, that would definitely make the case more interesting, if it ever gets to that. That money also means he’s way more likely for him to hire lawyers to get him off on some technicality so judges never have to take that on.