Posted on 03/12/2018 8:46:01 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Time and time again, we’ve seen mass shooters find loopholes in the law or ignore it entirely.
You can vote at 18. You can become a parent, work full-time, get married, or even fight overseas in the military. But if gun-control advocates get their way, you won’t be able to buy a gun until you’re 21.
In response to the February 14 school shooting at Parkland High School, the Florida state legislature just passed a bill that will increase the age requirement to buy guns –– an idea that’s gaining support across the country. During a bipartisan meeting on school safety, even President Trump signaled his support for this proposal.
Yet lower age limits on gun purchases won’t do anything to stop school shootings. Time and time again, we’ve seen mass shooters find loopholes in the law or ignore it entirely.
Adam Lanza was only 20 when he went on a horrific rampage at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn. But he used guns purchased by his mother, so an age restriction would not have saved a single life. The Columbine shooters were underage when they bought their guns, but got them from a 22-year-old friend.
Nikolas Cruz was over 18 but not yet 21 when he legally purchased the gun he used in the Parkland shooting, leading some to say the attack was preventable. But he was banned from bringing a backpack to school, let alone a gun, and was still quite well-equipped for the attack. Cruz spent nearly a year collecting an arsenal of rifles, so he would have had plenty of time to find someone else to purchase a gun for him if age limits were in place – like the Columbine and Newtown shooters did. So while the urge to “do something” about gun violence is understandable, age restrictions can’t stop school shooters from getting guns any more than they stop young people from getting anything else we’re not supposed to have.
The drinking age is 21, but that has never really stopped anyone. Thirty-three percent of high schoolers drink, and 18 percent binge drink. Most of them aren’t even 18, let alone 21, and the drinking only gets more extreme in college. So take it from a student at the University of Massachusetts –– such a wild party school that’s it’s nicknamed “ZooMass” — that no age limit can stop determined young people from getting their hands on things they aren’t technically allowed to buy.
And while raising the age requirement to buy a gun wouldn’t stop a determined killer from getting his hands on one, it could stop a single mom from protecting her child. Writer Bethany Mandel shared a childhood story in the New York Times that speaks to this reality: “It was a spring night and I was sleeping with my window open, which was right above my bed; I loved breathing in the fresh air. That night, in that open window, I heard the banging of a ladder, and by the time my mother made it into the room and began loading her gun, a man was about to climb in.”
A higher age limit would disarm a 19-year-old rape survivor who just wants to feel safe again. It would tell a 20-year-old veteran, home from deployment, that she can be trusted to protect national security with an M16 overseas but can’t handle keeping a gun at home.
A higher age limit would disarm a 19-year-old rape survivor who just wants to feel safe again.
Meanwhile, the only states that have chosen to limit all guns sales to 21 and older are Hawaii and Illinois. The results have been far from clear: Illinois ranks in the top ten states for gun homicides, while Hawaii celebrates low rates of gun violence.
Some might argue that limiting gun purchases to 21 and up is a reasonable restriction. After all, you already have to be 21 to buy alcohol or rent a car, and even to buy a handgun from a licensed dealer. But even if we pretend that those restrictions are actually effective, gun-control proponents miss a crucial piece of the puzzle — you don’t have a constitutional right to get drunk or drive a car. Yet you do have a right to bear arms, so we shouldn’t concede the same restrictions for all gun purchases so quickly.
If we’re to allow any meaningful infringement upon gun rights, it should at least be one that’s effective at reducing violence — and limiting gun purchases to 21 and up clearly won’t be. So if you’re old enough at 18 to fight for our country with a rifle overseas, you should be able to have one at home for self-defense too.
It's time to start REPEALING gun control restrictions.
Maybe the age for voting, military service etc should also be raised.
26th Amendment that dropped the voting age to 18 was only passed in 1971.
The 18 year old age limit was created when FDR droped the draft age to 18 during WW2. There is no reason to keep it now.
Times have changed. US Society has greatly changed. 18 year olds now are not nearly as well prepared for the responsibilities of the adult world.
Let them get some experience assuming the responsibilities of adulthood before granting them all the rights of adulthood.
There is no real good reason to have adults, and minor children, in the same school system Raise the age to 21 for everything.
Voting is a Constitutional right yet up until 1971 it was limited to 21 years and up.
I’m sorry but an 18 year old is considered not mature enough to have a Drink but mature enough to buy a gun? That being said I fully support bringing down the drinking age to 18 for all of those stated in the article’s reasons! Hell if you marry and DIE for your country you sure as hell ought to be able to have a drink!
At age 18 we’ll give you a real assault weapon and send you where you can die. But don’t think you can buy a semi-automatic carbine to defend yourself or your family.
what is very troubling to me as well is the push for police to have ‘greater flexibility in determining who is a danger to themselves and others’ for the purposes of ‘taking guns from such individuals’
BOTH are violations of second amendment, however, the one i mentioned has the potential for massive abuse- removing guns for life from people who are no actual danger to anyone-
It is no such thing. Under the original text of the Constitution, voting by the people was not mentioned at all. The Bill of Rights makes no mention of voting by the people, either. Voting by the people was (and largely still is) governed entirely by the States. Constitutional rules on voting began to appear piecemeal after the War Between the States. Your argument is silly: up until 1920, women could (and in many States, were) denied the power to vote. Are you willing to argue that women can, Constitutionally, be denied the right to keep and bear arms?
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you fail to comprehend?
Sure it makes sense...once you realize the agenda is total disarmament.
Raising the age will do nothing to stop a person from getting a gun. It’s not hard to find one if you have the money to buy it. We have 13 and 14 year old kids who drive around in stolen cars while carrying stolen guns. Laws are for the law abiding citizen. They don’t stop the criminal, they only punish him when he is caught and convicted.
For many years, many of the things mentioned in this article were for over 21. And in a number of these cases, even 21 is not old enough. But just because times change, doesn’t mean the problems being corrected do.
I don’t feel a person is an adult, in way too many cases, at 18. Many agree on this site that the education system in this country is dumbing down kids. I agree. So if they are receiving an education when the school systems are not only miss-teaching ABC’s, then why are the public allowing them to set the standard in moral and responsibility instruction? And then saying they are ready for the outside world when most are not.
Signing of contracts, owning a weapon, driving a car, are all things that require a responsible person. And when the schools are driving it into them that they are not responsible for their actions with a weapon, and that the company that built it is, is a perfect example of where our true needed basic education of our kids has failed.
So if you have a child that is not old enough to play with a toy, and could hurt someone along with themselves, don’t you take it away. Someone will always use the philosophy that well they give them guns in the military. Yes they do. And they give them a complete and understandable re-education on what they have, what it can do, and what not to do, period. A lot of it backed by incarceration threats or other incentives to pay attention and learn what will keep you out of trouble and it is your responsibility to follow them. And they back it up.
So, first education, it’s okay to have the toy, second education, you are ultimately responsible for the safety and protection and you will pay for errors. Third education, used correctly it will save you and your unit’s lives to do it right so you better or we will do anything from take your rank, throw you out, or put you in jail. No slap on the wrist from a school VP, or suspension for a day. Or like they do in the Florida county that had the shooting, listen to Obama and not punish problem dangerous kids with a police record that could have kept the legal gun out of lawless Cruz’s hands.
The system has become a gamble. And what do you get? More gun violence, and violence period, more drugs, more child pregnancies, more thieves, more child molestation, and more excuses to blame the wrong people to bail them out.
A lot of people say the old west was violent. It wasn’t. People behaved themselves because the local townspeople just took it into their hands and killed people for not conforming. So people took notice and tried to conform.
And this “old west” theory was still in operation when I was a kid in the 1950’s. I didn’t know it because I was young and it was never talked about. But there were no drunks, druggies, bad men bothering women, and you could leave your house and car unlocked with the keys in the ignition in that town and they were never disturbed.
A bad person was asked to leave town, then assisted to leave town. And if they came back, they just disappeared. Problem solved. Of course we can’t do that now as the system is too protective of people like that. But did you notice the protection of the victim hasn’t changed? Welcome to the land of lack of responsibility and education to get it that way.
rwood
Raising the voting age makes more sense, but if they do raise the gun age, then raise the age to vote and the age to drink. The age of majority should be the same. There is not some brain development quirk that says you can drink and vote, but you still need more development to own a gun. That is arbitrary thinking.
You argue like a typical liberal, full of hysteric bombast and rabid ignorance. Are you sure you are on the right website?
The US Constitution (1789) stated in Article I, Section II, Clause I:
“The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.”
I owned a 20ga shotgun when I was 7yrs old and kept it
in my bedroom closet. I had no reason to take it
out until I went pheasant hunting with my dad. I am
in no way any kind of a gun grabber.
If we are all subject to backround checks then so
should all 18 year olds. However, in some states an
18 year old may have their juvenile records sealed.
If such a situation prevents a backround check then
I am all for raising the purchase age to 21 except,
maybe, for active military personnel.
In WV for the last year we have had constitutional carry for 18 y.o. With a basic training course. Despite the lies of all the city pigs and progs there has been 0 issues. The same with all constitutional carry states.
If they can strip constitutional rights from one group of law abiding citizens, they can do it for all.
Sargent: General, the recruits don’t seem to shoot as well as they used to. Not one of them is a good shot.
General: Sargent, I’ve noticed. It’s going to cost some of them their lives.
If there’s a mass shooting by someone who’s 28, they’ll want to raise the age to 29. And so on.
If you are old enough to vote ,your old enough to protect that vote. With an AR-15 that is.
You don't get to cherry pick which parts of the 2nd you want to quote. The Courts have all ready ruled that this notion of unrestricted gun rights is hogwash. You cannot own a fully automatic weapon without a special permit. You cannot buy a handgun without meeting the age requirements and a background check. You all are as bad as the Anti-Gun Jihadists with your absolute refusal to have a rational serious discussion on the topic. Instead your cling to half understood slogans and emotion based hysterics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.