792
submitted 3 weeks ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 116 points 3 weeks ago

The GOP is right, there is a 2 tiered justice system. It tilts in their favor at the moment. Look at all the shit Trump has gotten away with. Look at the light sentences handed down for a majority of the Jan 6 traitors. And they are still bitching about it.

[-] Veraxus@lemmy.world 34 points 3 weeks ago

Look at the illegitimate, corrupt, terrorists in SCOTUS currently ruling this country by fascist fiat.

[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago

You might say it’s Supremely Fucked.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

It tilts in their favor ~~at the moment~~ because they pervert the system.

[-] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

They have been weakening the system for decades and it's paying off.

[-] riquisimo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 62 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, I mean, yeah. Sounds about right, yeah.

[-] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 58 points 3 weeks ago

Okay, yes, under the law that currently exists, Hunter Biden was absolutely guilty.

On the other hand...

Doesn't it strike people as just a little bit fucked up that you can lose a fundamental constitutional right that easily? Should you lose the right to, say, vote if you smoke pot (which is still illegal under federal law!)? Should you lose the right to a trial by a jury of your peers, with legal representation, if you're addicted to Oxy? Should you be forced to go to an evangelical, Christian nationalist church if you're an alcoholic? There's a pretty decent argument that conviction of a violent crime--including misdemeanor domestic battery--should cause you to lose your 2A rights. But this isn't a case of someone being convicted of anything.

[-] OlinOfTheHillPeople@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago

Shout it from the mountains:

Republicans are coming after your guns!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Counterpoint, no rights are absolute. There are conditions and restrictions on every "fundamental constitutional right." Freedom of speech does not include slander or inciting violence. Freedom of religion does not protect abuse or acts of violence. Freedom to bear arms does not include weapons of war or negligent behavior.

Addiction is a medical condition, and should not be treated by criminal courts. On the other hand, addiction does undermine an individual's rational thinking. Should addicts be permitted to carry firearms? I don't think that is an unreasonable restriction.

The problem with my argument is that I don't think our restrictions on gun ownership go nearly far enough. Addiction is a problem, but it's not the most pressing problem we have related to gun violence.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

I think that Hunter was only prosecuted for this crime because of who his father is. A real witch hunt. But at the same time, I'm not losing any sleep over it. He broke the law, and he's someone with a lot of resources at his disposal and should have known better.

As for the law itself, I think the law should exist, but the potential punishment of 25 years is absurd.

I do think that keeping guns out of easy, legal, access of active drug abusers is appropriate. But as you say, without a conviction, the scope of those restrictions should be narrow and appeal-able.

And the punishment for being untruthful on a checkbox of an application should be a slap on the wrist. Confiscation of the firearm(s), and maybe community service. It should be the governments job to do proper screening, not the applicants job to screen themselves out.

But like I said before, I'm not going to lose any sleep over this, even if I do think it's an unfair punishment for an arbitrarily enforced law, on someone targeted by a cult simply because of his family.

[-] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I do think that keeping guns out of easy, legal, access of active drug abusers is appropriate. But as you say, without a conviction, the scope of those restrictions should be narrow and appeal-able.

Considering that the form 4473 that you have to sign to purchase a firearm makes no mention of alcohol, I think this is hypocritical, at best. What's the difference between alcoholics owning a firearm, and heroin addicts owning a firearm? All I know is that I would be way less worried about the junkie gun owner than a raging alcoholic gun owner.

Its a dumb law, that was probably spawned from racism. Nobody should have their gun rights removed if they did not do or threaten anything violent.

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I mean, I'd like guns to be inaccessible (legally) to raging alcoholics too. You're right that a crackhead and alcoholic can both be very destructive. But that doesn't mean I want crackheads to have guns just because an alcoholic without a felony can own one.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago

I think the only people who remotely give a shit about Hunter Biden are 24 hr news channels.

[-] groats_survivor@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

I assure you, Hunter Biden will not receive my vote for President of the United States

[-] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago

Bitch THIS is what the bias news is at work.
Aoc is dumbing it down way too much but yes it is great that sometimes the system works.

It is AWFUL it only works when it is in the favor of one side and that side is NEVER held accountable.

So fucking weird that these Holy Christians are convinced their ~~Christain~~ republican figureheads and leaders are righteous, when everything about our current situation can equally biblically paint them as followers of the antichrist. but what do I know.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 33 points 3 weeks ago

How about they review FFL applications and see what box Don Jr checked when he bought his guns.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 27 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Well yeah…the problem is that the republicans don’t accept when it works. We’ve know this for years now, some dem leader gets accused of something and they most often step down or get charged it was legit. Republicans get accused of something they actually did and praise lawd Jesus Christ sowhatifidid and they stay put.

[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago

It's also yet another example of how hard and fast the right will pivot to spin reality into more insane propaganda.

Faux News Before: Hunter will never be indicted because Daddy Joe is corrupt!

Faux News Now: Hunter is taking a fall for Daddy Joe to distract us all!

See how that works. Not to mention their doublethink, such as Biden is "an evil mastermind" but he's also a doddering old man who can't spell his own name." And their faithful flock eat it up and believe it all, because it reinforces their expectations while wrapping their understanding of reality so much that they're expectations become what the propaganda tells them they should be.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

It's like the lazy foreigner that takes your job.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 22 points 3 weeks ago

Is Hunter Biden even relevant to anything political? Are the Dems as a whole actually losing anything by letting him face this conviction?

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

He's relevant in that this is the first time the child of a sitting president has been convicted of a felony, but I highly doubt that this will dissuade anyone who would have voted for Biden from doing so. Most people who say otherwise weren't voting for him anyway. NOT letting him face the conviction would certainly have had a negative impact, though!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 7 points 3 weeks ago

Only thing I can think of is among low information voters it sort of looks like both democrats and republicans are charging one another with crimes

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Silentiea@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Since when are all politicians just three letter abbreviations? AOC, DJT, MTG, where did this come from I hate it

[-] scroll_responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 3 weeks ago

LBJ, JFK, FDR

Hell, TR had a two letter abbreviation!

[-] hardaysknight@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

My guess is back when Twitter had the 160 character cap

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago

FDR and JFK pre-date that by a bit.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[-] Lightsong@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Dems: if our representative is guilty, get rid of them! Repubes: if our representative is guilty, forgive them!

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

You mean, like Al Franken or something? Because Hunter ain’t elected

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FiniteBanjo 9 points 3 weeks ago

It's strange that people really believed anybody on the left would oppose some random corporate businessman's sentencing.

[-] 33550336@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Beaver@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago

Meanwhile maga republicans still cant accept that trump is a felon

[-] 5in1k@lemm.ee 6 points 3 weeks ago

Just let me know when it starts working.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
792 points (98.1% liked)

News

21707 readers
4006 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS