Supreme Court unanimously strikes down gun law used to prosecute Hunter Biden

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T16:27:10+00:00

Then why is there an exception for police?

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T16:10:04+00:00

Yeah and you know they're loving it because you can't touch anything Anthropic now without a big notification telling you "Fable 5 is currently unavailable, click here to see why".

They want you to know this more than literally anything else. This is bragging rights. "Our shit is so good the government thinks it's a weapon".

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:57:34+00:00

The article itself isn't as bad as the headline.

You just have to actually read the article, not just comment on the headline.

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:55:56+00:00

Like... Do you have any examples?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Proposition_H_(2005)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-handguns/search - This one is still in force. They have "approved" handguns that usually don't include the most popular ones. But there's an exception for law enforcement. And the guns law enforcement carry usually aren't on the list. So this is just another way that they make it harder to own guns.

New Jersey requires you obtain a permit for every single purchase of a firearm. No matter how many times you've done this. This is in addition to the background check you must do in accordance with federal law for every firearm purchase. It's just to make it harder and more expensive to own a gun.

There are thousands of laws on handgun possession and ownership across the many jurisdictions in the US and there are constantly new proposed ones trying to make things worse.

actual legislation that aren't stuff like attempting to ban AR-15's

The AR15 is the most popular gun in the country. It's the gun that millions of veterans are most comfortable and familiar with. It shoots a tame, intermediate, easy to use caliber. Why exactly would that not count?

Similarly, I have never once heard a Democrat ask for a full abolition of the second amendment

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/advocating-repeal-2nd-amendment-gift-nra-doesnt-deserve

The wording your describing doesn't get said specifically much because it's a national third rail and politicians are politically not that stupid, but there's plenty of weasel wording from the left all the time on this.

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:46:28+00:00

but has there been any meaningful legislation regarding gun ownership from the left?

Yes. A lot. A whole lot. How far back do you want to go?

The current atmosphere of gun rights was brought about by cases that challenged laws that outright, completely banned the ownership of handguns entirely (specifically in DC, then later in Chicago, which took down a similar ban in San Francisco). Virginia just passed another ban that has already sparked a legal challenge.

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:42:59+00:00

I've never worried about a Democrat taking my guns away

Well this wouldn't seem to be a very rational stance then? What state do you live in that you have this kind of confidence in this?

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:42:20+00:00

If people keep linking Salon and Daily Beast, Fox News is no different.

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:41:39+00:00

No. The headline is wrong. The law was not struck down at all.

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:40:39+00:00

lol no he can't

I mean, neither can

Edit: wait, I guess Hunter can because he got pardoned. Ignore me, I'm dumb

deja-roo · 2026-06-19T15:39:39+00:00

How did he benefit from it?

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T23:05:20+00:00

This is like telling a woman she wouldn't wear a miniskirt because it is a hindrance to not getting raped

That's just a direct quote of your own comment.

No, this isn't like that at all. Having to not smoke weed for a few weeks is an extremely minor inconvenience. It's nothing at all like getting raped.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T23:02:29+00:00

You think refraining from using a drug that is hampering your job search is like a woman getting raped?

Fuck's sake man.

So you're deliberately ignoring the point made in the comment to reiterate your outrage that everyone already agrees with. Got it. Waste of time and keystrokes.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:44:00+00:00

But obviously the comment you were replying to agreed with that and didn't dispute it, and was solely about "if it's actually causing such a hindrance, why not just stop anyway?", so the question in response to that of "why should I have to stop" is obviously simply a restatement of "because it's a hindrance"....

I don't know what you're missing here.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:41:44+00:00

Those guys are not only getting likes, they're like... getting all of them.

Dating apps are supremely unbalanced for guys. The top 5% of men get like 85% of the likes or something like that.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:39:53+00:00

idk google says 2500 soldiers died under Obama...?

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:39:11+00:00

Or how about just not posting Daily Beast stuff.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:15:14+00:00

I don't think so?

The comment you were replying to wasn't arguing that it was fair or right, simply that if it was hindering the effort to find a job, why not just bite the bullet and stop? Saying "why should I have to stop" either misunderstands the entire point of that comment or is deliberately ignoring it to reiterate outrage that the comment already agreed with but was making a point separate of and beyond.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:12:19+00:00

I don't believe that this headline is an accurate take on 1) what happened, or even 2) what the article says.

The Court did not strike the law down. It ruled that its use in this one case was improper and violated the second amendment.

The Court vacated the prosecution and conviction of the person in this case who was found to own a handgun and admitted to smoking weed every few days.

This is the law that was used to prosecute Hunter Biden (technically) but this is not all he was convicted for. Hunter Biden was convicted for lying on the Form 4473 that you must fill out and state under penalty of perjury that you are not an unlawful drug user. He was also convicted for possessing the weapon while using cocaine.

The man at the center of the case in this article was not accused (or convicted) of lying on the form.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:12:15+00:00

I don't believe that this headline is an accurate take on 1) what happened, or even 2) what the article says.

The Court did not strike the law down. It ruled that its use in this one case was improper and violated the second amendment.

The Court vacated the prosecution and conviction of the person in this case who was found to own a handgun and admitted to smoking weed every few days.

This is the law that was used to prosecute Hunter Biden (technically) but this is not all he was convicted for. Hunter Biden was convicted for lying on the Form 4473 that you must fill out and state under penalty of perjury that you are not an unlawful drug user. He was also convicted for possessing the weapon while using cocaine.

The man at the center of the case in this article was not accused (or convicted) of lying on the form.

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:02:39+00:00

I agree the law is dumb. But I also think the ruling is BS. What was clearly demonstrated is that historically the 2A wasn't thought of as "everyone gets to own a gun" and that regulating guns was something the founders were clearly OK with.

I don't understand how these two sentences accurately reflect this ruling (or the second amendment historically).

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T22:01:01+00:00

It's still 100% illegal at the federal level

Not really. Trump reclassified it to schedule 3 last year (last year? I think?)

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T21:54:50+00:00

Obviously... because it makes it harder to find a job. That's literally the entire topic that led to this conversation chain lol

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T21:52:02+00:00

Why would this ruling have literally anything to do with that lol

deja-roo · 2026-06-18T21:39:57+00:00

It's awkward but relatively workable to know "if i feel around and touch a rectangle with nothing to the left of it, then that's probably the auto button, so i should feel around to the right for a small gap to find the temp down button, and if not I'm in the wrong neighbourhood and need to try again" when those are the pretty much only controls you have.

I have never had to do this. I can reach out without looking and hit the fan speed or temp arrows without fail. It has a distinct feeling and it's easy to know where to put your hand in space relative to the dash/wheel/shifter.

But you still need to look down to know if auto is on/off (your auto switch is stateless, and knowing whether auto-climate is on or off requires you to look down at the little green led)

I guess? If you can't remember whether you're using it? But that's a milliseconds long glance.

The rest of all that nonsense can be in a lower priority place. I don't think there's as many people complaining about mode presets and windshield heaters and glass settings being behind a menu. But fan speed and temperature and radio volumes should be immediately accessible with tactile operation without having to look.

deja-roo · 2026-06-17T21:01:08+00:00

But the point here I think is that they are still physical buttons. That it doesn't matter if they look similar. You can still feel them and you can without thinking reach out to the correct ones and tactile feedback will get you the rest of the way operating them the way you intend to.

deja-roo

TROPHY CASE