21 To Buy A Handgun

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm probably gonna pi$$ everybody off by saying this, but I do not believe that anybody under the age of 21 should be allowed access to any firearm unsupervised.

That is just ignorant. I know more people over 21 that I don't trust with firearms than people under 21 that I do trust.

You were right about one thing though. You did piss me off with that comment.

Just because I might not be mature by some doctor's standards of mental developement does not mean I dont know whats right and whats wrong and whats safe and whats not.

I'm 19 and I probably own more firearms than you do and that includes 3 handguns. I also drive an 8,800 Lb 300 horse power truck which I consider much more dangerous.
 
EM, come see me when you're 30, and tell me how mature you think you really were when you were 18-19. ;) ( Hell, looking back, I'm surprised that I survived my teen years, sometimes... And I was relatively well-behaved. )

Also, as for those 18 year old soldiers in Iraq... they're under the supervision and control of people a good bit older than they are, most of the time. They certainly aren't just running around on their own, doing whatever they please. ( Remember what I said about not letting sub-21 year olds have weapons unsupervised? ;) )

No matter though...I'd be shocked if I ever heard the first teenager claim that no, they didn't need less control or freedom to do as they please. They each and every one always think they're the exception to whatever rule is applied. I suppose it's just human nature.


J.C.
 
Did you even bother reading the articles at the links I posted?

I read those last semester in General Psychology at college.

Though I may not be at the biological age of maturity because my frontal lobe is not fully developed, I am mature enough to realized that just because someone is a professor at Harvard doesn't mean that their work should be taken as the absolute on any subject.
 
Then I'm kind'a curious that you find my opinion "ignorant" if what I'm basing it on is taught in college.
And we won't even get into the first-hand observation aspect of it...

Edit- I just read your own edit to your post... It's not just one professor who's come the these conclusions, it's several. And also my own step-daughter's neurologist, FWIW...


J.C.
 
Just because it is true that the human brain is not fully developed until the early twenties does not mean that it renders young people so impaired that they are incapable of making responsible, well thought out descisions. They don't teach that people under 21 should be supervised while engaged in potentially dangerous acts.

You are making blanket generalizations. Is that really the high road?

Assuming I'm wrong, should we create a new branch of law enforcement to supervise people under 21 while they use firearms? Because that is completely constitutional and in no way violates American ideals, right?

I could make a generalization about people from tennesse sticking their noses where they don't belong, but I'm not from Harvard or a neurologist.
 
Why, because I get angry when someone says I need supervision while enjoying my firearms because I am not mature and that person has never met me?

Sure I went with my gut feeling to argue with you instead of ignoring what you posted, but is that because my frontal lobe is not fully developed? That is entirely possible. But I did not grab my handgun and drive up to Tennessee to shoot you because I am unsupervised.

Are people under 21 more impulsive than those over 21? In most cases, yes.

Do people under 21 need to be supervised at all times when they are in possession of a weapon? Not unless they have a previous record of bad descisions, as is the same with anyone over 21.
 
But I did not grab my handgun and drive up to Tennessee to shoot you because I am unsupervised.

No, but I'd bet good money that if you and I were having this conversation face-to-face, you'd probably try to take a swing at me before it was over. ;)

And i also can't help but notice that you get mad, "pop off" with a post, then go back and edit or add to it.... which also falls in line with the "acts on gut instinct and impulse" aspect of what the Doctors are claiming.

Fortunately, here, you get the chance to go back and correct a mistake. However, in the real world, without an edit function, that "popping off" and not thinking can get somebody killed.


J.C.
 
My understanding of straw purchase is when person A buys a gun legally and then sells/gives it to person B, when person B is prohibited from owning/posessing/purchasing firearms

In this case, person B is not prohibited from owning/posessing/purchasing the gun in question. However, another person, the FFL is prohibited from selling to him.

That's entirely different from person B being unable to own/posess/purchase guns on his own, and having person A buy then sell to him.
 
Fortunately, here, you get the chance to go back and correct a mistake. However, in the real world, without an edit function, that "popping off" and not thinking can get somebody killed.

Just for the record, each edit I made was to add something that I thought of after I had already posted and you had not responded, not because I had made a mistake. I was avoiding double posting.

I don't know about you, but I don't take posting on the internet as seriously as I do shooting at things.

My understanding of straw purchase is when person A buys a gun legally and then sells/gives it to person B, when person B is prohibited from owning/posessing/purchasing firearms

In this case, person B is not prohibited from owning/posessing/purchasing the gun in question. However, another person, the FFL is prohibited from selling to him.

That's entirely different from person B being unable to own/posess/purchase guns on his own, and having person A buy then sell to him.

I agree with akodo. I've had my father buy handguns for me recently and rifles and shotguns for me before I was 18. Each time the FFL knew exactly what we were doing and had no problem with it. This occurred over several years infront of many different dealers. I have even bought a shotgun for my younger brother because he was too young.

The way I understand the law is that there are only age limits on purchasing certain weapons from dealers. There is no age limit for ownership or use.
 
Jamie,

I was hunting unsupervised by the age of 12. Alone, after school. In fact, I'd walk by my local high school on the way to the woods. No accidents. No incidents. I was well trained with firearms safety.

Heck, the kids in my neighborhood had regular rock throwing fights. No one ever escalated to sling shots, bows, pellet guns, or firearms. Everyone had access to all of them. Look back at pre-1968 police records and newspapers. There were no legal barriers to teenagers buying firearms and many did so. There wasn't blood in the streets.

I don't know if you've realized it yet, but there's a great deal taught in college classes that is ideologically driven or otherwise divorced from reality.

A good many of the instructors' greatest dilemma in their teaching career is how to wear their tinfoil hats in public.

Somethng that you might find valuable while taking classes in college is to look at classes in critical thinking. A good class in critical thinking will give you a stricter standard for validation of data than "it's being taught in college." Basket weaving is being taught in colleges.
 
I see both sides of the story.

Many young people would make good handgun owners at eighteen. Matt, I feel that you are probably a member of this group. You've been shooting for years, and likely, the misticism of firearms has worn off. You realize the level of responsibilty that comes with gun ownership; especially with a gun that you can carry around in your pocket everyday. Unfortunately, many young adults don't share these same qualities.

Young adults are much more likely to "sweat the little stuff." They take things more personally and are more likely to overreact, then an older adult with more life experience would, were that person in a similar situation. While variables such as like mental health, drug use, and even cultural upbringing come into play, these cases are the exception, not the norm. I'm reffering to your average, mentally stable individuals.
 
Person "A" buys a handgun and registers it on thier name. "A" owns this handgun. Now he doesn't want it, so he sells it to person "B". Now "B" registers the handgun on his name.

EM,

Here's the interpretation of the law as provided by the ATF http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#b2 -
(B14) May a parent or guardian purchase firearms or ammunition as a gift for a juvenile (less than 18 years of age)? [Back]

Yes. However, possession of handguns by juveniles (less than 18 years of age) is generally unlawful. Juveniles generally may only receive and possess handguns with the written permission of a parent or guardian for limited purposes, e.g., employment, ranching, farming, target practice or hunting.

If you are 18 and your father buys it for you it looks like it is not a straw purchase.
 
Jamie C. said:
No, but I'd bet good money that if you and I were having this conversation face-to-face, you'd probably try to take a swing at me before it was over.

It may be that your unfortunate personal experience is such that you'd think this, but I see little indication that any of the youngsters posting so far deserve such an unfair characterization. If you've received a threatening PM, perhaps (and you should let the mods know if you have), but so far I think you're the only one with the belief that you could goad these kids into taking a poke at you.

I would not allow my own son to have unsupervised access to a firearm before the age of 21, but I’ve taught plenty of kids to shoot that exhibit more maturity and responsibility with a firearm than many “adults”.
 
I was hunting unsupervised by the age of 12. Alone, after school. In fact, I'd walk by my local high school on the way to the woods. No accidents. No incidents. I was well trained with firearms safety.

Heck, the kids in my neighborhood had regular rock throwing fights. No one ever escalated to sling shots, bows, pellet guns, or firearms. Everyone had access to all of them. Look back at pre-1968 police records and newspapers. There were no legal barriers to teenagers buying firearms and many did so. There wasn't blood in the streets.

In 1968 we never locked our doors, slept with the windows open, left the keys in the car (many times with the windows rolled down to boot. It really sucked when it rained that night and you jumped in the car the next morning. ), and had never even heard of a security alarm.

Most of the kids i grew up with engaged in pretty much the same pass-times as you've outlined, and did go hunting/shooting on a regular basis. It was a rare thing though for there not to be an adult in the near vicinity. And god help ya if you touched the guns without permission.

There was also both a respect (and fear) of the police, the courts, and the law in general. Nobody wanted to go to jail, nobody wanted to end up in court. And it was a rare thing to even know anybody who had been jailed. A kid who'd been jailed or in legal trouble was pretty much looked at like he or she was a 3 headed monster.

These days, most people wouldn't even think of leaving their doors unlocked during the day, much less at night. And security companies are making a fortune from residential homes.

And then there's the car alarms.... How many folks reading this have one, or at least know someone who does?

As for kids and the law.... anybody actually stopped and counted how many times in a year that they see a report on the evening news of some child killing or robbing somebody? Me, I've lost track. There's been at least 6 reports on the local news in the last week. Nashville's police chief, Ronal Surpas has also been on the new, talking about how juvenile involvement in violent crime is on the rise. Again, this was just in the past week.
And I won't even bother telling you the stories of the 15-17 year olds that I thought I was going to have to shoot, while I was with the S.O.


Sorry folks, but things are different now than they were in 1968. Very different. And no, I don't know exactly what has changed but it's pretty obvious that it's not for the better.


I don't know if you've realized it yet, but there's a great deal taught in college classes that is ideologically driven or otherwise divorced from reality.

A good many of the instructors' greatest dilemma in their teaching career is how to wear their tinfoil hats in public.

Something that you might find valuable while taking classes in college is to look at classes in critical thinking. A good class in critical thinking will give you a stricter standard for validation of data than "it's being taught in college." Basket weaving is being taught in colleges.

I've been to a college or 2 in my time... even have a degree in mechanical drafting and design. Also attended the local police academy.
So yeah, I have at least a bit of an idea how far out in "left field" some instructors and professors can be.
Due to my step-daughter's medical problems, I've also gotten to spend quite a bit of time with psychologists, psychiatrists, and neurologists, these past 7 years. We usually see one or the other of them about twice a month.

As for critical thinking.... that's a skill you can not survive without, when you spend as much time as I have, dealing with both "normal" and "problem" children. When I was around 11 or 12 years old, my parents decided that we needed to become a foster family for TN's then Department of Human Services. I've had more than 30 foster-brothers and foster-sisters in the 25 years my parents kept that up. Some quite normal, others about as messed-up as a human can get. We all got to attend more than a few classes and lectures on how they were best handled and dealt with.

So, although I'm certainly no expert, I believe I know a thing or two about children and how they think and operate. And anything i don't know, i have no problem asking the real experts about.

One way or the other, I most certainly don't think the people in the articles I linked to are the tinfoil hat-wearing variety. And if they are, I suppose I'd better go get fitted for one as well, since what they're saying very much fits in with what I've personally seen and experienced over the years.




J.C.
 
One question. I'm pretty new here, so don't make fun of me for asking this, but what does the term "tin foil hat wearing" mean? I guess it has something to do with gun-grabbing liberals.

Anyway, commenting on the original thread topic. I am 19 years old. I have a brother who is 27. He acts like he is about 12 quite a bit. Put it this way; the guy still buys toys and action figures and comic books. I don't think I'd trust him unsupervised with a handgun. I personally own two rifles, both of which are kept in my room, so I am "unsupervised" with them quite a bit. And I've never fired them except at the range.

Furthermore, does three years really make that big a difference in someone's maturity level? How much does someone really mature between 18 and 21?
 
"Tin (or aluminum) foil hat wearing" originally applied to people who "weren't wrapped too tightly" and felt that wearing a foil hat would prevent space aliens from either controlling them with thought control beams or extracting their thoughts with a beam. It has come to apply to people, depending on the context, who see a government conspiracy in every event that occurs or believe in government thought control. It is still an allusion to a lack of grounding in reality.

EDIT: Some people do mature considerably between 18 and 21. Some people take much longer to reach the same stage. Some never do. Some people make an effort their entire life to continue to mature.

Think back three years to when you were 16. Have you matured since then? Did you stop maturing when you reached 18? Do you think, based on your experience, that you will be even more mature when you hit 21? 25? 40?
 
So you trust an 18 year old to vote, buy an AK47 or Mossberg 12ga, or drive a tank, but you don't trust him with a .38 revolver?

Well where to begin, first off there are very very few 18 yr olds that i would trust to do much of anything especially make an informed or smart decission in the way of voting. i personally was driving a m2a2 BFV at the ag of 18, so that is nothing special. Heck most 18yr old kids shouldn't be allowed to drive a car much less a 32 ton military vehicle. I know from experience and the fact that i was once a kid as well as you, and everyone else on this forum, that some (not all) but some are not the brightest. Hell they should be lucky to have the freedom to even have a weapon, rifle or pistol. i personally have always preffered rifle shooting anyway, and have had ar's and ak's and mini-14's and such, and just kinda stayed away from handguns because they didn't have the same apeal to me. and only within the last year have i became a pistol shooter to the degree that i shoot rifles! You don't have to agree that is my opinion! Thanks!

I'm 19 and I probably own more firearms than you do and that includes 3 handguns. I also drive an 8,800 Lb 300 horse power truck which I consider much more dangerous

nothing like a college kid that has no idea about the real world! being in the army and hatted by the local cops because we are military and the college kids are the ones they let off for speeding and such, and always target us, if there is a fight at the local club, no matter who started it the solider is going down town! we really don't take lightly to college kids. blasting off at the mouth, with no regards to the people that they are bashing. That person, might just be somebody that puts there life on the line to allow you to have the freedoms you don't deserve but by the Blood of all those before have gainned, think about it. I do what i do so you can say and do what the law allows and, on the flip side i am allowed to say what i wish, you don't have to agree. check out myspace maybe somebody there will, have your same outlook!
 
All I have to say is, it really makes me sad and disappointed to see such bigotry and irrationality. I started to explain all of the myriad reasons why Jamie's argument is a crock, and then deleted it. There's no use arguing with a bigot, because no matter what you say they're never going to hear it. I could post ten thousand reasons and examples of responsible eighteen-year-olds, and people like Jamie will never accept it. Perhaps it's a failure on his part to imagine that other people could be more responsible than he was at that age. Maybe it's just exposure to too many bad examples of irresponsible teenagers. Heck, maybe he honestly believes in the Cause of protecting the children. It makes no difference.

It seems to me that once a man turns 21, he loses all memory of what it was like to live without the rights he suddenly takes for granted. He has all that he needs, all those behind him can suffer like he did. I can only hope that when I'm older I can look back and remember clearly, and sympathize with those less fortunate.

There is so much more I would like to say, but cannot fully nor clearly express in written words. Suffice it to say, the system of assigning responsibility based upon arbitrary dates and numbers is inherently unjust, no matter how many or how few are excluded. It always has been, and always will be.

I feel the temptation to go through Jamie's posts sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and point out each and every fallacy in them, but I will not do so. His mistakes are clear enough as it is. I only wish our elected officials did not share his mistaken beliefs.
 
hso said:
If you are 18 and your father buys it for you it looks like it is not a straw purchase.

That's not quite correct. It used to be ATF's ruling that it was only a straw purchase if you bought a handgun for someone who was ineligible to purchase themself (under 21, felon etc). If you look on the FAQ for "straw purchse" they show that they dropped the "ineligible" interpretation a few years back.

Now, pretty much if you buy a firearm FOR someone else, eligible to possess or not, even if said subsequent sale was legal, you have committed a "straw purchase". You and I (non-felon, 35 yr old, perfectly legal) go to the gunstore and I hand you a few hundred before the sale to buy me a pistol or long gun because I don't like the new white color of the 4473; we've just committed a "straw purchase".

You go into the store with your own money and get the gun for me because I spilled a Coke on my pants and don't want to drip on the carpet and I pay you out in the parking lot? "Straw purchase."

It used to be the ATF was solely concerned with non-eligible types getting their hands on guns from dealers. Now they just want to be sure everyone buying a gun gets their own name on a 4473.

A small shift of emphasis in enforcement, but very telling. Makes their job easier by not having to prove "intent to arm a known badguy".
 
jamie,

Don't we have all sorts of other laws to handle those minors who commit a crime with a handgun?

You know, the same ones we use to control OVER-21 yr olds who misuse handguns?

The same ones we use to control those over 18 who misuse long guns?

Etc, etc, etc.

You remember those, laws that only criminalize behaviour that actually, directly interferes with the rights of others?

We used to rely on those before we got the idea that everything should be regulated beforehand for our own good.

Oh, those under-18 year old brains were just as "undeveloped" and "immature" back then before stuff was regulated. I bet the crime rate wasn't any worse.
 
You want me to go fight and die for your freedom at 18 but you wont even allow me the rights that I would be fighting for?

If you strip my rights untill I turn 21 force the draft age up to 21.
 
Are most 18 year olds mature enough to purchase firearms and use them unsupervised? Probably not, but thats not the point.

Since 18 year olds are considered old enough to vote, serve in the military, and be criminally tried as an adult, I think that ALL rights and priviledges should be granted at the same age. Which in this case is 18.

It is for this reason that I think that 18 years olds should be able to purchase alcohol, own handguns, etc. It has nothing to do with maturity. It has everything to do with a double standard. It doesnt make much sense to consider a person an adult in some regards, but not an adult in other regards. Either someone is an adult, or they are not.

Just my $0.02.
 
You want me to go fight and die for your freedom at 18 but you wont even allow me the rights that I would be fighting for?

If you strip my rights untill I turn 21 force the draft age up to 21.

you can at ease that crap right now, this is an all volunteer military, no body is getting drafeted so that argument dosen't work there highspeed. strip you of what rights? please explain. Hey maybe if you were in the arena of willing to make the ultimate scrifice then i might fill sorry for you, but hey i don't! How do you think i feel, i spent all that time trying to stay alive, and come back to stateside and can't even have a drink to celebrate, get over it just like i did! heck american coke was enough for me after drinking there "coke". The bubbles kicked my butt, no telling what alchol would have done to me!You are not making any argument that i haven't heard before!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top