• remotelove@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      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.