In a video posted by spokesman Steven Cheung, Trump pointed to the gun and said "Wow," before adding: "I've got to buy one. I want to buy one."
      • remotelove@lemmy.ca
        17·
        1 year ago

        It’s a question on a federal background check. For people who live in states where scheduled drugs are legal for recreation, it’s a grey area. The state wouldn’t care, but the feds do.

        It’s basically boils down to “gotcha” requirements. If you get investigated for federal crimes and also own firearms but live in a state where some scheduled drugs are legal that you use, the fed can still just flag any future checks and charge you with lying on any previous background checks.

        I am not a fan of that kind of legal fuckery, especially if a person happens to be charged with a crime they didn’t commit and still get investigated.

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          312·
          1 year ago

          It’s worth noting that this kind of shit never happens and the only reason Hunter is being charged with it is because that’s all they could make stick

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        167·
        1 year ago

        In this case the crime would be purchasing a handgun in a state in which you are not a resident.

        Handguns can only be purchased in your home state. It’s why California’s handgun roster is such a big deal. They simply refuse to allow new models of handguns to be sold there regardless of whether or not their features are illegal, and buying them out of state is prohibited.

        With long guns, the gun’s features must be legal in both the state where the sale is taking place and the state in which the buyer lives. With pistols it’s simply illegal to transfer the firearm to someone from out of state.

        If I was from Arizona and wanted to give a single-shot 22 plinking pistol to my Dad in Texas, I’d have to sell it to a local firearms dealer, have them transfer it to a Texas dealer, and have my Dad buy it there.

        • HewlandRower@lemmy.world
          234·
          1 year ago

          I dunno what state you live in, but the majority of what you stated isn’t true in the vast majority of the country.

          • IMongoose@lemmy.world
            11·
            1 year ago

            Ya, I live in a more restricted state and have purchased a handgun from out of state. It goes to a firearm dealer and they transfer it to you after doing whatever background checks your state requires. The gun isn’t sold to the dealer, they just hold it while everything clears. I don’t know anything about interstate private sales though.

            One fun fact though is that you can buy an M1 Garand from the government and they’ll ship it to your door. So that’s pretty neat.

            • remotelove@lemmy.ca
              5·
              1 year ago

              For an M1 Garand, the requirements are a little different than just getting a background check.

              For those who care: https://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/eligibility-requirements/

              I am currently in Colorado, and person to person firearm transfers are prohibited, unless you have the appropriate license. I bought my Taurus .40 from a friend in South Carolina when I lived in North Carolina. It was perfectly legal without needing an FFL transfer.

              Laws get weird in different states like the person above said, but in Colorado you can buy a rifle if you are from out of state but you must be a resident for a pistol.

              I haven’t read up on any recent law changes about that though. Colorado just implemented a mandatory three day wait after a background check, so there is that.

        • Maeve@kbin.social
          4·
          1 year ago

          So how do those large swap meets work with out of state residents all furiously filling out bg check forms and purchasing?

    • grayman@lemmy.world
      136·
      1 year ago

      Hunter is most likely going to walk for good reason. What he was charged with are unconditional laws. If he walks, so will Trump. And that’s assuming you can pin Trump with unlawful use first.

      DOJ knows they are getting crushed with Hunter. Even 2A orgs offered legal help to him. They know the laws can’t be upheld by an honest judge. So why hit Trump with the same charges that they’re losing their shit over with Hunter?

    • kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world
      43·
      1 year ago

      No, it isn’t. Hunter is being charged with lying about drug use on a gun form. This would be Trump buying a gun with active indictments against him.

  • geosoco@kbin.social
    92·
    1 year ago

    It’s funny to watch his facade occasionally fall and the curtain to be peeled back, and yet the show just keeps going.

    Unlike other politicians, the trail of grifts with him is long, and yet people still keep him going.

        • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
          391·
          1 year ago

          It’s also people who brush off inconvenient information because a guy hates all the people they hate and they wish they could have a huge platform to say what he says.

      • takeda@lemmy.world
        19·
        1 year ago

        There are multiple things. Part of it is that they never hear of news like this part of it is that "there’s no way he did all of that, the fake news/dwu state/globalists are making things up, because they are scared of him. And for the remaining: “yeah, dauber he did it, but democrats are already doing it/would do it if they had a chance”.

  • NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world
    731·
    1 year ago

    While Trump remains the frontrunner in the GOP race for the White House, he has also been indicted in four criminal cases this year, and therefore cannot purchase a gun under the law.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.ggEnglish
        24·
        1 year ago

        I mean, you don’t want a Trump getting in office and then stopping someone from running for president with a bunch of bogus charges. That’s why there aren’t that many ways to completely disqualify someone. It’s a concept that’s proven to be timely as it’s part of how Putin stays in power.

        … the presumption is that we should all be smart enough to realize the charges are real and not put the felon in the Whitehouse.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        13·
        1 year ago

        Because stopping him from running would require a constitutional amendment of some sort, OR he be disqualified under the 14th.

    • HewlandRower@lemmy.world
      191·
      1 year ago

      A federal judge in texas ruled last year that preventing people under indictment from purchasing firearms was unconstitutional based on the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, just FYI. So I don’t think the situation is as cut and dry as it would have been just a couple years ago.

      • NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world
        7·
        1 year ago

        I don’t really think it’s super worthwhile to spend a bunch of time discussing if and should about those cases here. The larger point is that he apparently tried to lie about his gun cred by pretending to buy a gun. And that of he had, he would have been committing the same crime they got Hunter with.

        In other news, Bruen is terrible.

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    683·
    1 year ago

    Is he shopping for his final firearm? You know, the pistol that stops him from being taken to jail?

  • argo_yamato@lemm.ee
    31·
    1 year ago

    So a spokesman posts on Twitter that he bought a gun and then someone has to delete the post and say it is not true? Sounds like amateur hour for his campaign but I thought he only hired the “best and brightest”.

  • aseriesoftubes@lemmy.world
    62·
    1 year ago

    The law only applies to brown people under indictment who want to purchase firearms, not white orange ones.

  • blindbunny@lemmy.mlEnglish
    41·
    1 year ago

    I can’t wait til he snorts a ton of coke he’s next debate so any one that’s ever done the drug can pretend he was totally sober, again.