Big difference here. You're right to bear arms is spelled out in the Constitution. Alcohol and for that matter pot consumption is not a right recognized by the Constitution. Hence the Feds or States can outright ban either. We still have counties in some states that are dry counties. No sale or possession of alcohol.
>>Big difference here. You’re right to bear arms is spelled out in the Constitution. Alcohol and for that matter pot consumption is not a right recognized by the Constitution. Hence the Feds or States can outright ban either. We still have counties in some states that are dry counties. No sale or possession of alcohol.
As a feeble attempt at flame protection: I am against the law and hope the NRA wins, but all the legal scholars here need to keep a few points in mind:
At one point in time, someone must have decided that there is a Constitutional right to alcohol because they had to create an Amendment to begin Prohibition.
This law does not create any new infringement (other than the myriad of infringements that we accept already) because a person 18-21 can still keep and bear a long gun. They just can’t buy it.
For the “old enough to carry a gun for the Army” crowd: remember that older guy who was always with your squad and yelled a lot? The 18 year olds had supervision that came with their weapons.