Will 18-20 year olds ever get pistol rights?

[Averageman]

Ok let me just make some points here,
-8 yr olds are not legal adults.And obviously either are 18 to 20 year olds in some States
-Military service does not equate superior handling of firearms.Ummmmm, yes perhaps it does, especially for those who are Combat Veterns.
I'm sure many, such as yourself would consider a Veteran of "The Battle of the Bulge" a relative untrained plinker, but I would condsider most of them miles ahead of those civilian school trained wanna bee's
-I have no fear of military service. That choice was taken from me in an
accident, I have served our nations veterans in numerous ways.
Perhaps you could then serve at a VA hospital in honor of our Veterans ?
I do not appreciate your coments about me, nor my injury.
I dont appreciate your comments either, the difference between your disability and mine is my disabilities were incurred by protecting the Country you live in, and the Constitution you misquote. I qualified and put my life on the line and was disabled in the line of my service.
-The difference between 8 yr olds and 18 yr olds is the LAW. Ones an adult
ones not. And neither is allowed to purchase or CC a sidearm in your State.
-Are you so selfish that you don't want Equal rights for all Americans?
No, you still dont "get it"; what I am saying is those who have served in combat have a much clearer idea than those who havent as to what it means to carry a firearm. They have risked their lives for yours, You arent qualified to do that, they are.
I believe it takes a trully special kind of person to serve our country.
No you would like to think you do, but clearly you have NO idea of the sacrifice
However, I do not believe that our service members should be superior
in class to the average person. I personally believe that is how the Founders believed as well. ALL men are created equal, At the time that was written by our founders Women and people of Color clearly didn't have that rightthey should be treated equally under the law, And clearly they were notregardless of stature or position. No one is above the law, And yet even then our founders gave recognitition to our Veteransand likewise no one should be given preference to rights not given to the average man And yet we still had Laws that regulated the age at which these rights were enabled to use. The commoner is equal to the king, that is one of the principals that our system of law is based upon. Military service should not constitute recieving unequal rights, whether they be granted by the States, or the Federal Government. And clearly you are wrong, if you are not wrong go get a VA disability due to your inability to join the Military or perhaps a VA mortgage, or purchase tax free items at the Post Exchange.Clearly we have hoonored our Veterans and should continue to do so
Not even close, but nice try

 

[Birch Knoll]

The obvious inequity of 18-year-olds being considered old enough and responsible enough to enlist, train, serve and fight in the military, but not being considered old enough or responsible enough to have the right to purchase handguns is not an argument to extend the right to purchase handguns to 18-, 19- and 20-year old soldiers. It is an argument to extend the right to all 18-, 19- and 20-year olds.

It is not their military service which makes them worthy of adult handgun rights. It is the fact that we consider them adult enough to to become soldiers, whether or not they decide to do so.

 

[Averageman]

It is not their military service which makes them worthy of adult handgun rights. It is the fact that we consider them adult enough to to become soldiers, whether or not they decide to do so.
I would disagree with you, these who do enlist are our best and brightest and have offered their lives in the defense of our Country
They ARE FAR superior than those who have not.
You dont take an ASVAB for a CC Licence.
You dont go through months of stressful training for a CC.
You dont go in to combat to qualify for a CC, as many of our Veterans under 21 do.
Let me explain something very clearly to you 8 hours of X-Box at the age of 18 does not make you an adult or combat trained.
You may feel equal to these Veterans, but although I may hurt your feeling ings , clealry you are not in many ways oir we would not be having this discussion.

 

[Birch Knoll]

I would disagree with you, these who do enlist are our best and brightest and have offered their lives in the defense of our Country They are ARE FAR superior than those who have not.

So much for "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal". I guess you'd be more in agreement with "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Yes, you are indeed a great American.

 

[Averageman]

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal".
Having been created equal, it is up to you to excel from the equal of your peers and seek a better position in life, being a Veteran of the Armed Services is part of separating yourself from the heard and seeking excellence in life.
I find it rather different at best that so many of those here find Military Service repugnant or less than desirable. So many here seem to have a reason why they cannot or will not serve and yet are an avid quoters of the Constitution.
Very interesting.
As someone who is retired Military and a disabled veteran from the Military ; I am prouf of a Family History of Service back to the Revolutionary War; I am proud of my Families service and find your quotes of founding fathers rather unique.
I have a brother in currently in A'Stan, a Nephew in the Old Guard and another in a Ranger Battalion. Two out of those three are under 21 and I feel they are far more than qualified to carry a side arm and so does the Military.
Just because you do not have the onions it takes to do these things, why would you condsider them less tha qualified to do so?

 

[Birch Knoll]

Listen, since you are so superior, could you back off on all the boldface and learn how to use quoting? You're making my eyes hurt.

 

[Dmitri Popov]

Averageman, I volunteered at the Huntington WV VAMC for four years, I also served my community for four years through the Army JROTC program. I have served my Vets. Not because I had to, But because I wanted to serve those who served for me. I can honestly say, in all my years talking to and working with wounded veterans you have the most skewed view point I have ever seen. Most vets are happy knowing they served their country. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder towards anyone who didn't serve, whether it was their fault or not.

I would really like to hear the viewpoint of some other vets on here.

Now as I believe that this conversatition has taken a direction other than that of the OP, I think I'm going to wait for some other comments to be posted befor I post again, because honestly anything to do with you is a dead-end and pointless.

 

[Birch Knoll]

Having been created equal, it is up to you to excel from the equal of your peers, being a Veteran of the Armed Services is part of separating yourself from the [strike]heard[/strike] herd and seeking excellence.

I find it rather [strike]differnet[/strike] different at best that so many of those here find Military Service repugnant or less than [strike]desireable[/strike] desirable. So many here seem to have a reason why they cannot or will not serve.

Very interesting.

As someone who is retired and a disabled [strike]veterna [/strike] veteran from the Military and who has a Family History of Service back to the Revolutionary War; I am proud of my Families service.

I have a brother in currently in A'Stan, a Nephew in the Old Guard and [strike]anothher [/strike] another in a Ranger Battalion. Two out of those three are under 21 and I feel they are far more than qualified to carry a side arm and so does the Military.

Just because you do not have the onions it takes to do these things, why would you [strike]condsider [/strike] consider them less [strike]tha [/strike] than qualified to do so?

Fixed it for ya, Übermensch. The spelling, anyway. I'm not gonna even try to fix the grammar or untangle your syntax.

First off, I doubt that very many here would consider military service repugnant or less than desirable. I'm quite certain that the vast majority consider it a highly honorable choice; this is not surprising considering that a great many of the participants here are either military veterans or currently serving in the military. In general, members of the firearms community are not known for being anti-military. One wonders how you could have formed that impression.

I don't believe anyone here would argue that your under-21 relatives serving in the military are in any way less than thoroughly qualified to carry a sidearm. Whatever gave you the impression that they were thought not to be?

And finally, you, sir, know nothing whatsoever about my onions, and clearly even less about my feelings about those who serve in the military.

 

[Averageman]

I can honestly say, in all my years talking to and working with wounded veterans you have the most skewed view point I have ever seen. Most vets are happy knowing they served their country. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder towards anyone who didn't serve, whether it was their fault or not.
That "Chip" as you call it may have come with a combined service of 30 years to my Country.
I am honored to have served your freedoms, please be honored to respect those of our Combat Veterans.
As you have stated you cannot serve in combat and have served in honor of those who have, please in honor of those Veterans,don't confuse that as Combat Service.
You haven't been there and obviously you cannot know.
To those who have eyes that I have offended....lets try to Cowboy up buckeroo.

 

[Averageman]

First off, I doubt that very many here would consider military service repugnant or less than desirable.I would suggest you read the entire thread then. I'm quite certain that the vast majority consider it a highly honorable choice; this is not surprising considering that a great many of the participants here are either military veterans or currently serving in the military.To those; I salute you, but there are many here, if you read the thread it is obvious we have some who dont , In general, members of the firearms community are not known for being anti-military. One wonders how you could have formed that impression.Once again, I have asked that combat vet's under 21 be allowed to purchase and CC a pistol regardless of state law.
I find it ironic that so many here find that wrong, or that there should be an excpetion for vets' especially combat vets.,

I don't believe anyone here would argue that your under-21 relatives serving in the military are in any way less than thoroughly qualified to carry a sidearm. Whatever gave you the impression that they were thought not to be?
read the threads, in essence there should be NO exception for combat vets under 21

 

[Birch Knoll]

That's what you get from this, huh? You hear people advocate for full firearms rights for all adults 18 and up, and what you hear is "no exception for combat vets under 21"?

 

[JCinAK]

I would disagree with you, these who do enlist are our best and brightest and have offered their lives in the defense of our Country
They ARE FAR superior than those who have not.

Some join to serve their country. Some join for the G.I. Bill. Some join because of financial hardship. Some join to gain citizenship. While I consider serving our country one of the noblest professions, service does not make one "FAR SUPIERIOR." I agree that veterans should have the right to defend themselves even under 21, but why shouldn't ANY responsible adult be able to?

 

[Averageman]

Some join to serve their country. Some join for the G.I. Bill. Some join because of financial hardship. Some join to gain citizenship. While I consider serving our country one of the noblest professions, service does not make one "FAR SUPIERIOR." I agree that veterans should have the right to defend themselves even under 21, but why shouldn't ANY responsible adult be able to?
Here is the point again for those who do not get it.
To qualify for the Military you have to meet some very high morale, physical and intellectual standards. What other persons meet these standards, go in to combat and carry in a combat zone, yet still cant carry in the States?

 

[Birch Knoll]

First off, I doubt that very many here would consider military service repugnant or less than desirable.

I would suggest you read the entire thread then.

I have re-read the entire thread. I was not able to find a single post disparaging military service in any way. Perhaps you can point me to the specific passages which you believe portray military service as repugnant or undesirable.

 

[Averageman]

I don't believe anyone here would argue that your under-21 relatives serving in the military are in any way less than thoroughly qualified to carry a sidearm. Whatever gave you the impression that they were thought not to be?
read the threads, in essence there should be NO exception for combat vets under 21, but here is my point.
My Nephew is a better candidate for CCas a Ranger than those who passed Ranger school on their X-box360. This difference should qualify him to CC before those who X-box 360 qualify.'
Sorry, thats just life.
The rest can wait until they are 21.

 

[Birch Knoll]

I don't believe anyone here would argue that your under-21 relatives serving in the military are in any way less than thoroughly qualified to carry a sidearm. Whatever gave you the impression that they were thought not to be?

read the threads, in essence there should be NO exception for combat vets under 21

Try to focus that superior intellect you were telling us about. How does preferring full adult firearm rights for all those over 18 to a special carve-out for military combat vets equate to believing that your < 21 relatives are unqualified to carry a sidearm?

Take your time, think it out, and show your work.

What's with your X-Box fixation, by the way?

 

[Averageman]

I have re-read the entire thread. I was not able to find a single post disparaging military service in any way. Perhaps you can point me to the specific passages which you believe portray military service as repugnant or undesirable.
No there have been those who saif they have better goals in life than serving in the miliatary, yet want to CC at 18.
I would suggest the join the Military,...ummm then they are unqualified do to disability, but shouldnt there be an expception for them?
No, you servem, you earn,you dont you wait. I woulkd think that not only simple, but hororable, but those who cant, find an excuse why they are equal in service as those who actually serve.
This is the logic
"I have a flat foot, but I am equal to a Veteran, afte all if my foot wasn't flat, I would have joined and served.
Therefore my flat feet equals aLL THE BENEFITS OF A VETERAN.

 

[Averageman]

Try to focus that superior intellect you were telling us about. How does preferring full adult firearm rights for all those over 18 to a special carve-out for military combat vets equate to believing that your < 21 relatives are unqualified to carry a sidearm?
[BThe point was as a Veteran, especially a under 21 combat veteran, you should have the right to purchase and CC a sidearm.
I have no clue what you are talking about.
Reading is Fun damentle[/B]

Take your time, think it out, and show your work.
The idea is under 21 Vets get CC and purchase rights for pistols,..that couldnt be right. I mean all 18 year olds are equal, those in Moms basement eating Doritoes and those in A'Stan sitting in an OP. Thats right they both contribute equally?
What's with your X-Box fixation, by the way?
Most of these under 21 guys here complaining have a Million + X-Box round count and dont undestand the difference between that and real life.

 

[Birch Knoll]

No there have been those who saif they have better goals in life than serving in the miliatary, yet want to CC at 18.

No, the poster said "How about those with higher aspirations, or just plain different goals than being in the military?" Do you believe that there can be no higher aspiration than military service? Or, if someone else does so, that such belief constitutes regarding military service as "repugnant or undesirable"?

You're taking great offense where no offense whatsoever was offered or intended.

I, for one, am grateful for your honorable service. I am saddened that you cheapen that service by attempting to convert it into a badge of superiority which you can lord over your lessers. Not all who serve understand the thing that they serve.

 

[JCinAK]

No, you servem, you earn,you dont you wait. I woulkd think that not only simple, but hororable, but those who cant, find an excuse why they are equal in service as those who actually serve.

The rights should be extended to ALL responsible adults. If 18 is an adult, then they should be able to carry. Furthermore, not all veterans are superior. The following link is to an article about a 22 year old veteran who shot his wife and baby here in Alaska. I know plenty of 18 -21 year olds who would NEVER do that.

http://www.adn.com/2012/01/20/2274354/lynch-traumatized-by-time-in-afghanistan.html

Also, firefighters, EMTs, etc have been injured/killed in the line of duty. How about them? Why NOT all adults? If the right is abused, well then there's that hotel room with guards they can stay at for awhile.

 

[lono]

I believe if you are old enough to serve and die for your country, then you are old enough to carry and defend yourself.

 

[Averageman]

How about those with higher aspirations, or just plain different goals than being in the military?" Do you believe that there can be no higher aspiration than military service?
No, I think selfless service iin the Military s the highest aspiration and if qualified all Men should do it.\
What higher goal can you have than to defend your country and constitution?

I, for one, am grateful for your honorable service. I am saddened that you cheapen that service by attempting to convert it into a badge of superiority which you can lord over your lessers. Not all who serve understand the thing that they serve.
I have the life I made, if others are lessers, that is their roleof choice. I neither named them lessers or made their choices.
Some Men are Men and some are lessers.
For the most part the lessers have chosen that role in life; I have not chosen it for them; but I cannot stop them from pursing mediocrity.
Again I am not advocating an end to your rights, just an extention of the rights of Veterans under the age of 21.
If you cannot read and understand this point, I have no way of making it more clear. These folks have had a dog in the fight, to a great degree most of you haven't. In essense while they were in combat, you were in WalMart. Give them the respect athat is due them and allow an exception and let those Vets unbder 21 to purhase and CC a pistols.
Are you so jealous and envious that they have had the guts to serve and deserve some entitlements that go along with the maturity that this combat service deserves?
If so, where were you when we needed Soldiers after 9-11?

 

[Birch Knoll]

I believe if you are old enough to serve and die for your country, then you are old enough to carry and defend yourself.

How dare you disrespect the military! How can you say there should be no exception for combat vets, you Xbox weenie???

</sarcasm>

 

[Averageman]

I believe if you are old enough to serve and die for your country, then you are old enough to carry and defend yourself.
It perhaps should be more about, if you were old enough and served, than old enough and sit on your butt at home and rode the coat tails of those who did serve.
Would you feel that way about D-Day Vets?
Some folks should be grabbed by the nose a dragged in to a Combat Zone, just to see what it is like for a minute. Just a minute, so they can measure themselves against the reaity of War. The appreciation of Veterans would be a reality instead of a hypothtical situation in which they exersize judgement in the warm comfort of thier homes.

 

[Averageman]

How dare you disrespect the military! How can you say there should be no exception for combat vets, you Xbox weenie???
Exactly.
and if you need sacasm then the point is lost on you. Scroll down to your gun of choIce on the X-BOX screen while real men fight in your PLACE.
I you dont care for the real life experiance then wait until you reeach the age of 21 in your civilian comfot.