The defense arguments in the Dirty Hunter trial are laughable. He is claiming that he didn't "intend" to buy a gun. He was shopping for a phone across the street. LOL. Somehow he miraculously found himself in a store across the street paying for a gun. But he wasn't "interested" in doing so. The salesman pressured him. So he apparently can't be held accountable for lying on the form. Imagine any other person being charged with this crime being allowed by a judge to make this argument. They are also arguing that whether someone is an "addict" is dependent on every individual's subjective assessment. As a result, even if Dirty Hunter was smoking crack every single day, he may not have considered himself an "addict" even though he frequently has referred to himself as such in books and interviews. One juror apparently wept when the defense attorney described Dirty Hunter's drug use. Unreal. Imagine being an addict, claiming you were not an addict, but then using your addiction to evoke sympathy from the jury.