Kind of odd
I don’t really care about Rush Limbaugh and don’t listen to him. But I found this odd:
The conservative commentator also must continue treatment for his addiction and cannot own a gun, according to details of the deal made public Monday. And the agreement says he “will refrain from any violation of any law.”
What does gun ownership have to do with it? For starters, Rush isn’t being convicted of anything. He is only agreeing to conditions to get them to drop the charges and discontinue their witch hunt. Why would gun ownership even be a condition of the agreement?
May 2nd, 2006 at 1:58 am
IIRC, felons can’t own guns. Thats probably the impetus for this restriction.
May 2nd, 2006 at 3:49 am
The agreement is extralegal. A court could only do that to Limbaugh if he were convicted. While he’s appeasing his prosecutors, he can offer all sorts of concessions to stop them from convicting him. Don’t deny the poor sissy his bargaining chips!
May 2nd, 2006 at 8:28 am
Well, Form 4473 does state that if you answer “yes” to the following question, you may not own a gun: “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”
I’d say that playing in the Valley of the Dolls qualifies one for a “yes” answer.
May 2nd, 2006 at 9:32 am
What she said.
If you freely admit to using drugs, as Rush did, you can’t own a gun.
May 2nd, 2006 at 10:05 am
He said he didn’t own a gun anyway, so presumably he wasn’t concerned about this restriction.
May 2nd, 2006 at 10:45 am
If you freely admit to currently abusing drugs, you cannot own a gun. It doesn’t say “are you now, or have you ever been…?”
May 2nd, 2006 at 11:34 am
As part of his plea agreement, everything will be dropped after 18 months of good behavior. So the prohibition on gun ownership is a temporary part of the deal. It’s not a permanent restriction.
Deals like this happen all the time; you see them alot with cops and DV misdemeanors. The “convicted” cop gets put on a desk for 6 months or so, goes to counseling, keeps his nose clean, and then gets his gun and patrol status back after the charges are dismissed.
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:25 pm
ATF Form 4473 does not say that a ‘yes’ answer prohibits gun ownership. It (the form) says a ‘yes’ answer precludes “purchasing or receiving a firearm”.
I don’t doubt that the feds have taken it upon themselves to prohibit ownership base on “unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance” but not by way of ATF Form 4473.
May 2nd, 2006 at 6:07 pm
While form 4473 might not say NO to ownership, some states do impose that restriction.
Doesn’t seem to be an unreasonable one, and since it appears to only apply until he has completed his treatment (at which point – in theory at least – he will no longer be addicted) I am not really troubled by it.
May 2nd, 2006 at 9:40 pm
The DA is obviously planning to cut a deal with some local thugs: Whack Rush, and get the other charges dropped. And he’s setting Rush up by denying him firearms.
I love a good, whacked-out conspiricy.
Also Liberal Larrys brownies.
May 2nd, 2006 at 11:28 pm
It doesn’t matter, Rush stated on Friday’s program he has no desire to own a gun, that he doesn’t need one. However, he does have a gift rifle he received that is on display in his NY residence.