By Jill McDaniel
While Hunter Biden clearly violated the law when he lied about his drug use on a background check form when he bought a gun in 2018, it may surprise people that there are two perspectives regarding the trial right now within the Second Amendment community.
Side A: Hunter shouldn’t be charged because all gun control laws are unconstitutional.
Side B: Hunter broke the law. He should be charged. My analytical stance:
The reality is both sides are correct.
To Side A’s point: Yes, all gun control laws are unconstitutional. Period.
In a world where everyone sees and understands the importance of their natural rights, and what those rights include for their individual liberty, we wouldn’t be seeing Hunter Biden in the news right now for a gun charge. We don’t live in that world yet. Hopefully we will in the future.
To Side B’s point: At one time, Joe Biden actually leaned toward Side A’s side. He once opposed additional gun control laws. He was supported by the NRA and people of the gun. But then he caved to the same incentives and temptations that most politicians do. He got greedy and he went where the campaign contributions and the Democrat Party orthodoxy were. He became an advocate for more gun control and gun bans.
Then he helped write and implement the very gun control laws that his son is now being charged with, all in order to stay with the party line and keep the campaign cash rolling in.
So, by the letter of the law — and who is responsible for putting those laws in place — it’s entirely reasonable that Hunter Biden was charged with lying on a 4473 form and is now being tried for it…despite the law’s inherent unconstitutionality.
In effect, both sides of the argument are right on this one.
Jill McDaniel is the Virginia Director of Women for Gun Rights, the academy director for the Virginia Citizens Defense League, a USCCA instructor and publisher of Mom-At-Arms.
8 Responses
No conflict here. He lied on a federal form. Regardless of which form it is a crime deserving of jail time.
What is the penalty for lying on a federal document?
Intentionally making false statements or concealing a material fact to a federal agent or investigator is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.
What is it called when you lie on an official document?
PERJURY. ( a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to deceive and with knowledge of the statement’s meaning: (1) he makes a false statement under oath or swears to the truth of a false statement previously made and the statement is required or authorized by law to be made under oath or provides false or misleading information on a government document.
“No conflict here. He lied on a federal form.”
Seems more to be proof that Schrödinger’s cat can be two things at once.
Actually very simple. Although most of us agree the law is Constitutional, for that fact to be “brought home”, requires the legal process to play out. Could be: Hunter goes to Prison, Judge rules against the law, Jury nullifies the law, Higher court/appeal reverses the action, Hunter is granted special treatment shining a bright light on a 2 tier Justice system, maybe some Dims realize it affects them too, it quietly goes away Media is silent. Were starting to swirl in the bowl. Gear Up!
I meant Unconstitutional.
I see it as karma.
Slow Joe’s DOJ is turning law-abiding American’s in to felons on a regular basis with their unconstitutional rule making….it’s only fair his son is one of them
The only reason that I’d be conflicted is because i know that I’d be in jail if I’d have done the same thing. Put him in jail!
Not conflicted at all. I see this as the perfect opportunity for the Biden Crime Syndicate to spend some of their corruption earnings getting some of the unconstitutional laws that Joe supports declared unconstitutional. That is a major win in my book, Hunter better pay for some good lawyers quick, cause the “Big Guy” is gonna be unemployed and that means an end to the corruption cash.
According to the Bruen decision, there was no such law when the BOR was ratified, therefore, the 4473 is an unconstitutional infringement.