even little kids, at age 5 or 6 get and completely understand the difference between, real death, and story death. we're not really going to weed out the ones who never put this together with any age restriction IMHO
a good argument against raising the age for gun ownership to 21
- Thread starter old lady new shooter
- Start date
- Status
even little kids, at age 5 or 6 get and completely understand the difference between, real death, and story death. we're not really going to weed out the ones who never put this together with any age restriction IMHO
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
People lacking a Y chromosome can have guns at age 16. People with a Y chromosome need to wait until 25 years old, unless they can prove they're responsible enough, by joining the military or something.
gunmechanic
Member
gunmechanic
Member
You cant discriminate based on age. I know some 10 year olds that have more sense that some 40 year olds .Your 18 you get any gun you want until proven otherwise not fit for the responsibility!
DeepSouth
Random Guy
I didn’t recommend or suggest we discriminate by age, or anything else for that matter.
The above discriminates by age.
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
Driving, voting, curfew, enlistment, draft, drinking, employment, smoking, sex, gambling, guns... they're all part of the age of majority dilemma.
There is no easy solution using the age of majority. Focusing on the specific topic at-hand, we cannot expect the state to solve any problem or perceived problem related to firearms with an age of majority. The state has no solution to the issues at hand and as long as people depend on the state for a solution, they will be lacking one.
There is no easy solution using the age of majority. Focusing on the specific topic at-hand, we cannot expect the state to solve any problem or perceived problem related to firearms with an age of majority. The state has no solution to the issues at hand and as long as people depend on the state for a solution, they will be lacking one.
AzShooter1
Member
I don't like discrimination on age but I think a background check should also find how many violent video games the kids are playing. They deaden the felling of killing someone making it no big deal.
Just the thoughts of an old man.
Just the thoughts of an old man.
.308 Norma
Member
"That's for sure and for certain." Quigley
Here is my strictly Constitutional point of view. 18 is the voting age. 18 is also military age. So, you are a voting citizen who can go to war and kill our nation's enemies at age 18. The Bill of Rights therefore applies to you fully at that age. I am not about to tell a person who has been to war that he can't have a gun because he is under 21.
They can set the drinking age wherever they want. Drinking isn't a specific Constitutional right. The right to bear arms is.
If you want to keep guns out of the hands of disgruntled video gamers, require a psyh eval, and formal training of some kind. Heck a lot of states require hunter's safety as it is. Military training would be acceptable of course.
As an exception to the above proposed policy, five members of the military of the United States have received the Medal of Honor for bravery above and beyond the call of duty while under the age of 21. The youngest was age 11 and was a drummer boy in the Civil War in Company D, 3rd Vermont Infantry. He won the medal during the Seven Days battle in 1862. If any other young man/woman in the future receives the MOH, he/she, by God, is entitled to anything he/she wants as far as I am concerned. I will buy him a gun and a beer with pleasure and respect.
They can set the drinking age wherever they want. Drinking isn't a specific Constitutional right. The right to bear arms is.
If you want to keep guns out of the hands of disgruntled video gamers, require a psyh eval, and formal training of some kind. Heck a lot of states require hunter's safety as it is. Military training would be acceptable of course.
As an exception to the above proposed policy, five members of the military of the United States have received the Medal of Honor for bravery above and beyond the call of duty while under the age of 21. The youngest was age 11 and was a drummer boy in the Civil War in Company D, 3rd Vermont Infantry. He won the medal during the Seven Days battle in 1862. If any other young man/woman in the future receives the MOH, he/she, by God, is entitled to anything he/she wants as far as I am concerned. I will buy him a gun and a beer with pleasure and respect.
Last edited:
No, it doesn't. The 26th amendment sets the voting age at 18. You are considered a full citizen at that age. A lot of states play the 21 for a handgun game. That really is age discrimination.
You really want the government tracking what your children do and watch in your home?
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Not really an argument, but an example. However, if that is example of why the law should not be changed to 21, is this an example of why the law should be changed to 11?
How about 12. They seem pretty level headed at this age...
https://www.yahoo.com/video/12-old-boy-defending-mother-190300013.html
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
You lost me there. What other Constitutional right requires a psych eval or formal training before one can exercise it? No speech unless you've been approved following a psych eval and been formally trained? No press? Excessive bail, un-fettered search, no due-process, delayed trials, cruel punishment and double-jeopardy, unless you've been "approved" and "trained"?
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
Re: hunter safety training. Hunting the game belonging to the people of a State is not a Constitutional right or liberty. It is within the authority of the people of the States to regulate the taking of their game. Bearing arms, on the other hand, is something the Constitution prohibits the States from infringing upon, considering the incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the States.
Are you saying you would be in favor of allowing 5 year olds to purchase firearms then?
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,574
The 12-year-old did very good.
The 11-year-old, not so much... I remember seeing that at the time and thinking if he were an adult he would have been charged because he shot the home invader while the latter was fleeing. I did have to chuckle when he described the lowlife as crying like a little baby though.
Haha, maybe the law should be no age limit south of the Mason-Dixon line. (JUST KIDDING!!!)
Or maybe instead of arguing about age limits, make parents liable for any illegal gun use by their minor children. ???
lysanderxiii
Member
At 18, you can:
- enter into contracts
- vote
- join the military
- buy a shotgun or rifle
- be tried as an adult for crimes
but you cannot:
- buy alcohol
- buy a handgun
I say the choice is binary: Either you are an adult at 18, or not.
If you say that 98% of 18 year-olds are too irresponsible to buy a handgun, they have no right to vote, enter into contracts or be tried as adults for crimes. Raise the age to 21.
Violent video games aren't the problem.
Everyone not living by the 10 commandments is the problem.
If we love our neighbors, not steal, and not murder. I think we could get rid of 99% of the current laws.
I do agree with the OP. People living on their own under 21 need access to firearms for protection. But I'm also for felons getting all their rights back after serving a full sentence.
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,207
And they can't buy ammo for it
DeepSouth
Random Guy
Just to be clear, I didn’t say 98% of 18 year olds are too irresponsible to buy a handgun. I simply pointed out that they are two very different groups of people and they should viewed separately… imo
As best as I can tell their are 3 ways to handle rights and age restrictions, and they all have pretty obvious and serious (imo) problems.
Argument 1: “rights” don’t have age restrictions, period.
Argument 2: The brain develops gradually, as does maturity, therefore rights should be granted gradually over time.
Argument 3: Once you’re old enough for one right, then you are old enough for them all.
Now I’m not promoting any one of the three, I think the subject is far more complicated than we give it credit for and I haven’t landed anywhere near a firm position. Not that it would matter if I did, I don’t see the current politically motivated system changing, as illogical as it is.
With all that said, I don’t think this is the conversation the OP intention on having and this is not the first thread on the subject recently, not to mention it’s only sort of gun related, so I’m just gonna bow out.
Apologies to the OP
AJC1
Member
California is enacting a bunch of laws to kill youth shooting, and like any sport new blood is always required, or the sport ages and dies. The problem with saying brain development is a factor, is we train soldiers at 18, we arm kids with drivers licenses, and we allow them to vote, and hold them legally responsible as an adult. To my knowledge there is no provision to allow some constitutional rights at one age while denying others. Again California is trying to lower the voting age which in theory would lower the age for legal gun ownership. I don't think they will be effective in either direction to move the current limits. My son was taught full gun saftey, navy rso style at 9. He goes regular and trains to be accurate. My daughter is not interested currently but still gets the saftey speal about every six months. If I could make one change I would teach gun saftey to all 6th graders nation wide. I'd do it myself if I could, I do not expect others to do what I wouldn't.
lysanderxiii
Member
This:
"Argument 2: The brain develops gradually, as does maturity, therefore rights should be granted gradually over time."
makes no sense to me.
At 18 you have the right to vote. That is a more powerful weapon than any handgun. Why should that be granted before the actual handgun?
Besides, at 18 years you are allowed to do everything an adult is allowed to do EXCEPT buy a handgun or alcohol.
The rational that an 18 year-old cannot buy a handgun was codified in the 1968 when the voting age was 21. In 1971 the 26th Amendment lowered the voting age 18, recognizing that 18 year-old are mature enough to handle the most important right there is.
There should be one age of maturity, at which time you are legally a full and adult, pick one 18 or 21.
That tired argument again? I'll use myself as an example.
I received my first gun, a NEF Pardner 20 gauge, for my fifth birthday and a Marlin Model 60 for Christmas later that year. Few years later I got a Playstation. In the ten or so years between getting that playstation and turning 18 I played just about every "violent" video game that was made, everything from the Call of Duty/Medal of Honor historical(ish) war games to the various Grand Theft Auto type and fantasy/zombie apoclypse games, and probably saw every action/horror movie made during that time as well. Also from the time I was about ten or so I was also given basically free reign to take any of the guns I owned, it was several more than the first two, and just leave the house unsupervised to go shooting or hunting.
When I was 18, I bought several firearms, joined the Marine Corps, was investigated for and issued a security clearance, attended advanced military training schools, and was prepping for my first deployment. I also was never, have never to this day, been charged with or convicted of any crime, used any illegal drugs, stolen anything, or done any of the other things that are common place in those games.
Despite all of that, under your plan I would have been denied the ability to buy any of those firearms because I played violent video games as a child.
And just for the record I still on occasion play several of those violent games, buy new guns somewhat regularly, maintain that security clearance while with working for a DoD contractor, and even teach shooting classes ranging from basic entry level safety to advanced team tactics.
Just incase anyone hasn't figured it out yet, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH VIDEO GAMES, OR MOVIES, OR ANY OTHER MEDIA. It's strictly related to the emotional and mental upbringing of the child and their ability to know what is right from what is wrong. Most "experts" tend to agree that is somewhere in the early teens at the latest with some arguing that occurs around the age of 7 or 8.
Does that mean that 8 year olds should have guns? Maybe, depends on the kid. To be more realistic, an adult should have all the rights and privileges that any other adult has, you choose and justify what constitutes an adult. For me an age limit makes as much sense as any other argument.
Shanvanvocht
Member
They can't buy ammo from a FFL, but you don't need a FFL to sell ammunition.
I've been looking, but can't find anything that says an 18-20 YO is legally required to tell the truth to an FFL when asked if the ammo they're buying is for a handgun or rifle. Do you know if that's a law?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
