Age discrimination in issuing carry permits

Oleg,
Great idea for a poster. I'd change the wording to "Carrying a gun for self-protection". I don't think most non-gunnies would know what you mean by "carrying".

I'm 18, I can be drafted, I could drive if I wanted, I could smoke if I wanted, I've paid taxes since I was 13 or 14, I can buy a long gun, why can't I exercise the other half of my constitutional right!

I do not think that 17 and 18 year olds are mature enough to carry a handgun. I realize there may be an exception, but not enough to justify it.

As for the comment that "If I am old enough to die for my country, I am old enough to drink." It does not take a great deal of maturity to follow training and orders and die if necessary. The youth are the ones who have the strength and stamina to do it in the trenches. May the Lord bless their efforts which have kept us free.

BUT that is not the same as mature enough to drink or to carry a handgun.
There is nothing wrong with age discrimination, but it must be practiced with wisdom.
Isn't issuing drivers licenses on an annual basis instead of 4 or 5 years to those over 75 discrimination? But many of us agree with it. So it is with 17 and 18 year olds and handgun licenses.

Jerry

I do not think that 17 and 18 year olds are mature enough to carry a handgun. I realize there may be an exception, but not enough to justify it.

Click to expand...

Mas Ayoob once saw an officer in trouble, and pulled over to give aid. He locked the doors, and gave his eleven-year-old daughter a pistol first. Generalizations about age are as silly as any other.

--Len.

I do not think that 17 and 18 year olds are mature enough to carry a handgun. I realize there may be an exception, but not enough to justify it.

Click to expand...

Well, I guess that if we treat them like stupid children they will try not to disappoint us. Instead we can give responsibility to young people and they will step up to the plate.

I know 13 year old kids I would trust with any gun I own. I know 39 year old adults I wouldn't trust with a water pistol. Age has nothing to do with it.

"Isn't issuing drivers licenses on an annual basis instead of 4 or 5 years to those over 75 discrimination? But many of us agree with it. "
Annual issue to old folk is discrimination... but not a maturity-based discrimination - it's a physical/medical discrimination. As you age, a lot of your parts break. Eyesight can worsen significantly, Alzheimers could set in... all sorts of things can happen to make you physically unable to drive a vehicle.
We also, as far as I know, refuse to give drivers licenses to blind people. Physical inability is the issue there, too. It's not possible for Ray Charles to see if the light's suddenly turned red.

An exception now and then does not negate the rule. I have seen many and do not consider 17 or 18 year olds mature enough. There may be a 13 year old more mature than a 39 y/o but I don't believe it, and never saw one.

This was not always the case when we had a different behavior by society in general, and kids did not think of shooting other kids or teachers because of whatever reason. With the viiolence of TV video games, movies, and general behavior, I agree with laws that do not permit CHL under 21. Sure the 17 y/o thinks he is mature, but he is not a good judge.

I stand by my statement, and so be it.

PS Nothing wrong with Mas giving his daughter a gun, locking the doors, and HIM going to the aid of an officer, but that is in no way the same as issuing her a CHL.

Regards,
Jerry

There seem to be something rather incongruous about being forced to register with Selective Service System(keep in mind that it is still a felony not to register) and be subject to potential drafts but being unable to exercise a Constitutionally guaranteed right.

budney said:

The problem is, the only people whining about it[age discrimination] are a bunch of snotty kids!

Click to expand...

I'm sure at some point the only people whining about racism were just a bunch'a darkies.

I stand by my statement, and so be it.

Click to expand...

That's cool with me. I'm more inclined to say that that's up to the parents' discretion. That means we both have common ground, though: I have no problem at all with parents still exercising that kind of authority over 17-18 year old kids. Sometimes I think people should be considered minors until age 30.

--Len.

I could go either on way on this, but most of the arguments presented here seem to be more demagoguery than reason.

18 y.o. in Indiana can apply for carry licence. No age discrimination here.

Click to expand...

Of course there is - against those younger than 18.

Any of you who want the age limit lowered, present your reasons. Don't pretend to oppose age discrimination when you actually endorse it.

I'm 18, I can be drafted,

Click to expand...

They have the draft in Pennsylvania? Lowering the age limit on handguns is just as likely as any Congress enacting a draft. Perhaps more so. JerryM is on the right track. Military service, not to mention voting, is not comparable to packing a handgun on one's daily business. That doesn't mean 18-year-olds shouldn't carry. It just means the argument is weak. Good emotional appeal, though.

Mas Ayoob once saw an officer in trouble, and pulled over to give aid. He locked the doors, and gave his eleven-year-old daughter a pistol first. Generalizations about age are as silly as any other.

Click to expand...

But Mas wasn't making a generalization. He was making a one-time decision about someone he knew well. And he certainly wasn't giving her a gun to carry every day. Unfortunately, the law has to make generalizations.

Similar picture of 17-year-old boy.
"At 17, he can be compelled to carry a gun to defend you.
But he can't choose to carry a gun to defend himself."

Click to expand...

Great poster for other countries, but we don't have a draft in the U.S.

Age by State

Since the age requirements are state-by-state, the only blanket answer would be a federal law.

So . . . do we want a federal law of this kind?

The other thing is military service.

I would certainly favor a specific age exemption for those who have served (or are serving) in the military, and who have completed training at least for basic weapons handling.

But, unless I misunderstand, this would have to be a state-level campaign.

Or do we want to go federal?

If you can vote and serve in the armed forces, then just why in the world shouldn't you be able to have a concealed carry permit?

The problem is that 18-year olds don't vote. They don't have much of a voice because they don't show up at the polls. It is simple politics.

As a frustrated 20 year old, Oleg, I agree with you totally! Unfortunately, this idiotic rule is unlikely to change. Since we have to set some arbitrary age at which someone is considered an "adult" we should make that adult for everything. We've chosen 18 as that arbitrary age. Unless we want to raise the age of legal "adulthood" to 21, I don't see any reason why an 18 year old should not be able to carry. This issue really burns me up!

If a mature person wants to carry a gun in America it really isn’t a big deal to do so unlawfully.

When I was 17, 18, 19 and 20 I carried (and carry now) without a permit.

Old Chinese Wisdom say: It always easier to beg forgiveness than to ask permission.

Plus, in most states concealed carry without the bribe (permit fee) is just a misdemeanor, in mine it is a class C.

/Its not like there is a cop on every corner frisking everyone who walks by.

I'll make one more analogy, and then "leave it with you."

Why do you think that auto insurance companies charge more to insure drivers under 25, or whatever it is these days? It is because they have more accidents because of immaturity and lack of judgment.

So it is with a handgun license.

Regards,
Jerry

It is because they have more accidents because of immaturity and lack of judgment.

Click to expand...

Hormones

If you can vote and serve in the armed forces, then just why in the world shouldn't you be able to have a concealed carry permit?

Click to expand...

Being old enough to be in the military is not the same thing as actually being in the military, where they impose discipline and channel youthful enthusiasm. They have boot camp for more reasons than getting in shape and learning how to shoot.

My feeling is that when your 18 you should be considered an adult for all intents and purposes.

• Ability to obtain a Drivers License
• Ability to obtain a CCW Permit
• Ability to buy a firearm
• Ability to buy alcohol
• Ability to buy tobacco
• Ability to vote
• Ability to enlist in the military
• Be considered for financial Aid without a parents information
• Be tried as an adult
• Buy Pornography
• Sign and enter contracts
• Be able to enter a bar or strip club
• Be considered an adult in regards to sexual matters
• Enter rated "R" movies

I am sure there are many more but the idea is that we set an arbitrary age. It is discrimination.

JerryM: Just because some 17-18 year olds are immature or act stupid that does not mean all are. If we applied that logic to all ages then noone would be able to carry.

if you remove the current age restriction, what would you propose as an appropriate age? how do we gauge a "responsible" age? i have a nephew who is remarkably composed and mature for a 16 y/o. he has a brother a year older who is a complete idiot and shouldn't be allowed to carry a sharp pen, much less a firearm. can't agree with you on this one chief.

albatross, i've got a feeling i'll be hearing about you taking a trip to club fed one of these days. carrying without a permit if one is available to you is dumb. you may not like the law, but it's still the law. further, carrying while you were a minor not only put your freedom at risk, but also your parents who quite possibly could have faced significant problems had you been wrapped up. your post alone reaffirms my opinion that the age restriction isn't a bad idea - although clearly even as an adult it doesn't matter to you what the law says.

My feeling is that when your 18 you should be considered an adult for all intensive purposes.

Click to expand...

I read that as "intents and purposes". Anyway, you go up against adults who are reflecting on all the stupid stuff they did and observed when that age. They scare themselves.

Yeah, it's "all intents and purposes."

a smart guy said:

It does not take a great deal of maturity to follow training and orders and die if necessary. The youth are the ones who have the strength and stamina to do it in the trenches. May the Lord bless their efforts which have kept us free. BUT that is not the same as mature enough to drink or to carry a handgun.

Click to expand...

Whatever... you all know what I meant.

I have been up for over 24 hours writing a term paper. Either way I will go back and correct.

Ah college.

When I turned 18 I bought 2 handguns legally through private sellers since the law says I can't buy from a FFL. I also carried legally with the mag separated from the gun since the law says I couldn't get a permit. So, can someone please tell me how these laws, that were nothing but attempts to deny my rights to access a handgun, has made anyone else safer. I am of the opinion that anyone mature enough to take command of their own personal safety, especially a young adult, is not someone you guys need to worry about. We ALL know that criminals will carry illegally anyway so why disarm me? I am now 22 so I don't really have to worry about this crap anymore but I feel sorry for those who are still affected. :banghead: