Age limits on handgun sales violate Second Amendment

[Special T]

The scary thing is how liberals want to lower the voting age to get more minors to vote their way. I bet if the courts held the voting age to the same as owning a firearm they may change their mind. Honestly the 26th amendment sets a pretty clear age as to when the constitution applies to people.

I think this discrepancy is what needs to be discussed. Either your an adult or not. ALL rights must be conferred at 1 age.  the B tardation of dropping it to 18 was political and voting rights was inferred by the courts. I'm not sure why gun ownership isn't the same... But who knows perhaps that is where we are heading

[CarbonHunter]

I agree. Adulthood or majority as it is referred to in the constitutional context should apply at the same age for everything and everyone. If your tried as an adult at 18 you should receive all rights of the constitution at 18 if you so choose to exercise them.

I also feel that if courts are giving in to the traditional history of gun ownership as directed by the SCOTUS that we should only have to argue that semiautomatic firearms have always been available to the citizens of the land since they were invented. Essentially ending the Washington ban.

[PsoasHunter]

Is every right tied to adulthood? Should the driving age be increased to 18? Cars kill more people than guns. 

[Bows4huntn]

Last time I looked, driving wasn’t a constitutionally protected right!

[CarbonHunter]

Driving is a privilege, just like hunting. There is no constitutional right to do either. Rights granted by the constitution apply to those of age 18 unless otherwise stated in the constitution.

[Moose Master]

The scary thing is how liberals want to lower the voting age to get more minors to vote their way. I bet if the courts held the voting age to the same as owning a firearm they may change their mind. Honestly the 26th amendment sets a pretty clear age as to when the constitution applies to people.

For voting only and in 71 things happen real quick.  States did lower drinking age but after years of stupidity age for drinking was raised.  Lots of extra people died because of lower drinking age.  Including innocent bystanders at the wrong place at the wrong time

[Chesapeake]

Alcohol and other drug consumption aren’t rights and I don't think fit in this conversation.
I don't see the connection between war and beer.

[Macs B]

Several years ago I was asked to represent a young man who had been tried as an adult.  Upon his acquittal we sued for his rights to be instated at the age he was declared by the court to be and adult.  At the age of 15 years he would have been legally able to vote, drink, serve in the military etc.  I honestly think we would have won the case if he could have kept himself out of trouble.  He was later arrested and convicted as a minor subsequently losing all of his rights.

[callturner]

#1. Hunting is a God given right that people have been doing since they landed here. Before regulation.  I wish people would care more about our legislators who are regulating us under there State laws and taking all of our rights away. Be it magazine bans, types of firearms, the right to purchase or sell things, Closing down small businesses with liberal regulations. The list goes on. A hand full of people make "Laws" to tell us what is "Legal" , yet I can drive 15 miles east to Idaho and watch people purchase firearms and do business as normal and not be breaking any federal laws. Wake up Washington!!!

[chukardogs]

Alcohol and other drug consumption aren’t rights and I don't think fit in this conversation.
I don't see the connection between war and beer.

There is no correlation between war and beer. War is bad, beer is good!
 However IMO, there's a serious flaw in the idea that an 18 or 19 year old can go to war for this country and lose their life but can't legally drink a beer. Seriously! I'm not saying the law should change to let the 18 or 19 year old drink. If society believes an 18 or 19 year old can't be trusted to know when to stop drinking, maybe that 18 or 19 year old shouldn't be allowed to represent this country on the battle field until he or she has reached an age that society deems to be adulthood.
 To the Constitution and as far as the 18 year old being able to bear arms. The constitution doesn't differentiate between a single shot Musket and a Glock 19, therefore the Supreme court will have to. I'd be willing to bet that the liberal view and argument will be that the law doesn't stop the 18 year old from buying a firearm, it just puts a restriction on what firearm he or she can buy. The right will say, the Supreme court doesn't get to add verbiage to the constitution and make a distinction between that single shot musket and the Glock 19.
 If an 18 year old can't buy a beer because of public safety concerns, the Supreme court could be persuaded to accept and decide for public safety purposes that they also can't buy a weapon that would be easy to conceal on their way to class because some 18 year olds are still in high school. Huh, that's probably something the people writing the constitution in 1787 didn't have to take into account.
 Who here thinks the writers of the constitution could have possibly foreseen the innovations in weaponry that would occur over the next 230+ years?
 Everyone wants to hold up the constitution when it benefits their argument yet the constitution's been amended 27 times since it was written and I'm sure it'll be amended many more over the next few hundred years. Of course, that's only if it isn't just trashed and tossed to the wolves because we've dumbed down our society to the point that people can't be expected to use basic common sense and care about their fellow man.

[CarbonHunter]

Several years ago I was asked to represent a young man who had been tried as an adult.  Upon his acquittal we sued for his rights to be instated at the age he was declared by the court to be and adult.  At the age of 15 years he would have been legally able to vote, drink, serve in the military etc.  I honestly think we would have won the case if he could have kept himself out of trouble.  He was later arrested and convicted as a minor subsequently losing all of his rights.

Shame you weren’t able to push this case through. There are lots of laws out there that can’t pass the “what if the shoe were on the other foot” test.

It amazes me how the left is constantly fighting to diminish the 2nd amendment but then turns around and says the constitutional rights of illegal immigrants are being violated…

[MADMAX]

I’ve always wondered why the second amendment is treated by our liberal friends to be less important than the rest of our constitutional amendments

It’s treated like a second class amendment to the constitution
It’s a dang shame


Seems pretty clear it scares them

The Second Amendment was created to guarantee citizens the right to keep and bear arms, primarily to ensure the ability to defend themselves against tyranny, protect their personal safety, and participate in a well-regulated militia, as the Founding Fathers feared a powerful government could potentially oppress the people without a well-armed citizenry to resist; essentially, it was intended to safeguard individual liberty by allowing citizens to defend themselves against potential government overreach and criminal activity

[Moose Master]

I’ve always wondered why the second amendment is treated by our liberal friends to be less important than the rest of our constitutional amendments

It’s treated like a second class amendment to the constitution
It’s a dang shame


Seems pretty clear it scares them

The Second Amendment was created to guarantee citizens the right to keep and bear arms, primarily to ensure the ability to defend themselves against tyranny, protect their personal safety, and participate in a well-regulated militia, as the Founding Fathers feared a powerful government could potentially oppress the people without a well-armed citizenry to resist; essentially, it was intended to safeguard individual liberty by allowing citizens to defend themselves against potential government overreach and criminal activity

You were doing great until you included "criminal activity "  Madison provided the final version and I  don't see your additional content. SCOTUS will decide this.

[MADMAX]

I’ve always wondered why the second amendment is treated by our liberal friends to be less important than the rest of our constitutional amendments

It’s treated like a second class amendment to the constitution
It’s a dang shame


Seems pretty clear it scares them

The Second Amendment was created to guarantee citizens the right to keep and bear arms, primarily to ensure the ability to defend themselves against tyranny, protect their personal safety, and participate in a well-regulated militia, as the Founding Fathers feared a powerful government could potentially oppress the people without a well-armed citizenry to resist; essentially, it was intended to safeguard individual liberty by allowing citizens to defend themselves against potential government overreach and criminal activity

You were doing great until you included "criminal activity "  Madison provided the final version and I  don't see your additional content. SCOTUS will decide this.

It’s called paraphrasing 🥴

[James]