Trump looking to increasing rifle age purchase limit.

In The Ten Ring · February 20, 2018, 11:58 PM

I'm not a fan of the article so don't assume I support this.

https://nypost.com/2018/02/20/trump-...steps-on-guns/

The very fact he is discussing such things is disturbing......my first thoughts on Trump may have indeed been correct (Dem in GOP clothing).

TXAZ · February 21, 2018, 12:02 AM

I don’t have a problem with it.
After working with teenage boys for more than a decade, I’d proffer there are a fair percentage of them that at 18, are not mature enough to make many decisions alone, particularly when it comes to dealing with anger and interpersonal issues.

rkammer · February 21, 2018, 12:09 AM

I could agree with banning the sale of semi-auto rifles to under 21 persons as long as it is not against the law to "possess" one. That way, a kid could still be given a semi-auto as a gift from a parent who, hopefully, sets the proper rules for using it. He or she could also shoot another's legally owned semi-auto with their permission. It might decrease some of the school and other shootings but, I don't think it would make a significant difference. If the mentally unstable wants a gun, they will probably find a way to get one.

Prndll · February 21, 2018, 01:19 AM

A better description would be a Rep in conservative clothing.

In light of what just happened in Florida and everything else going on, I'm good with the idea. Those that are under 21 that want the responsibility that comes with a firearm can inlist.

LogicMan · February 21, 2018, 01:37 AM

The problem with these seemingly simple gun control proposals is that you get a Feinstein who decides to write it in such a way that it encompasses a lot of other stuff as well, which then gets the bill killed. For example, I've seen some in the media saying, in regards to will there be some type of gun control passed now, "They couldn't even get bump stock legislation passed after the Las Vegas shooting..." well that's because Feinstein went and wrote it where it bans bump stocks and any device that allows you to fire the weapon more quickly. Which means bump stocks and probably every aftermarket trigger you could buy. So not surprisingly, the legislation was heavily resisted and died.

A proposed piece of legislation that only banned bump stocks and only raised the age to purchase semiautomatic firearms to 21 might have a shot at passing (I am not saying I am okay with banning bump stocks, just explaining what I see as maybe plausible as passable legislation).

**44 AMP** · February 21, 2018, 02:03 AM

I just saw the late news segment on Trump's statement. I find the choice of language interesting.

He said that his administration had conducted an investigation to see if bump stock devices like the one used in the Vegas shooting were legal under current law.

He did NOT say they were illegal.

He said the ATF is going to propose a regulation change....

He also mentioned raising the age limit to purchase to 21...

The devil, of course is in the details, and we will have to wait a little bit before we see what is actually proposed.

He's against anything that would turn a regular rifle into a machinegun.

Here's where the serious risk comes in. Expect to kiss "bump stocks" goodbye, but bumpfire stocks are a novelty item. A fun range toy, but their use in Vegas is their death warrant in the public mind.

And, personally, I prefer them to "grab" (restrict/[prohibit) bump stocks, rather than the semi auto rifles they fit on. Despite the fact that it is wrong, in principle, I don't think there's any saving that particular baby this time.

If we "give" them bump stocks, its possible the wolves will lose momentum. Because, they won't rest until they get something...and the longer they chase the sleigh howling, the bigger the pack gets. And, its a sad fact but our system that when enough people demand something be done, something will be done, and politicians tend to listen to the loudest voices, and the wolves howl louder than we do.

The serious risk to our continued ownership of semi autos will be in the exact language used in the proposed regulation about "things that turn ordinary rifles into machineguns".

Rate of fire is almost certainly a term that will be used. Personally, I think it will probably used in such a way that it will could be interpreted to our detriment. Rate of fire covers both the cyclic rate of the firearm, and the rate a skilled user can fire it. Depending on what the language of the proposed regulations are, they could have huge unintended consequences.

As far as raising the legal age to purchase a rifle, that was set in law in 1968. The President cannot change that. Its not a regulation, its a law. Congress can change the law, the President cannot. But, he can ask for the change, and sign it, if Congress passes a new law.

We need to look closely at what is actually proposed, not what is talked about in sound bytes.

Whether or not Trump "betrays" any promise or not is not the issue to be concerned about here. There's other places for that.

s3779m · February 21, 2018, 03:29 AM

There are worse things President Trump could propose. I would guess congress will jump on this band wagon. Here in Texas you have to be 21 to buy a handgun so I guess this would not be that different. 18 year old's could still buy rifles. But what I have against this proposal is it too is blaming the gun and not the person firing it. There have been other shootings where the shooter was over 21 so this would not have had any affect, nor will it stop the next shooting, leading to another "talk" about more laws. I would have preferred President Trump to address the need to do away with gun free zones, including ALL FEDERAL LAND and buildings. I would have liked to see the President encourage people to take training on how to be more effective in self defense and to encourage communities to look for means to PROTECT the children instead of looking to take away rights. We, as a people, will not solve this by looking to the federal government for answers. Too many of them have stated over and over that their goal is to take away guns, you can not solve this problem talking to them.

Nathan · February 21, 2018, 04:51 AM

Quote:

But what I have against this proposal is it too is blaming the gun and not the person firing it. There have been other shootings where the shooter was over 21 so this would not have had any affect, nor will it stop the next shooting, leading to another "talk" about more laws. I would have preferred President Trump to address the need to do away with gun free zones, including ALL FEDERAL LAND and buildings. I would have liked to see the President encourage people to take training on how to be more effective in self defense and to encourage communities to look for means to PROTECT the children instead of looking to take away rights.

Well said.

If a law is to be passed, it should remove eased pathway to school shootings as discussed in this quote.

If rights are on the chopping block, what rights are next for chopping. All of these rights limit government which is a key issue nowadays.

zukiphile · February 21, 2018, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

If rights are on the chopping block, what rights are next for chopping. All of these rights limit government which is a key issue nowadays.

On the nose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXAZ

I don’t have a problem with it.
After working with teenage boys for more than a decade, I’d proffer there are a fair percentage of them that at 18, are not mature enough to make many decisions alone, particularly when it comes to dealing with anger and interpersonal issues.

Was that also your opinion on long gun sales when you were 18?

As to emotional maturity and decision making, you've described quite a few 30 year olds.

Lohman446 · February 21, 2018, 09:19 AM

At 18 are you an adult or are you not? If you are not old enough to be trusted with a gun how can we possibly trust you with a VOTE? Likewise how can we compel through the draft to military service? Can we even accept those that volunteer for the same? Can we hold obligation to civil contracts? Can we allow you to go $50K (or more) into debt for education?

I'm fine with the discussion but the discussion needs to be about moving up the age of majority. This "your a citizen with full obligation but not full rights" is not a path I want to start on.

*Yes I realize that handgun sales already fall under such a circumstance. I'm less concerned about alcohol sales and consumption as they are not mentioned as individually protected rights in the Constitution. Obviously those behind the Whiskey rebellion would disagree with the distinction but that is a foot note in history.

5whiskey · February 21, 2018, 09:23 AM

Quote:

And, personally, I prefer them to "grab" (restrict/[prohibit) bump stocks, rather than the semi auto rifles they fit on. Despite the fact that it is wrong, in principle, I don't think there's any saving that particular baby this time.

Agreed that bump stocks are not the hill we should choose to die on, however I agree that the wording will need to be narrowly focused to only include devices that basically seek to work around full-auto NFA items and not minor improvements such as may be seen by a good trigger tune.

Quote:

I could agree with banning the sale of semi-auto rifles to under 21 persons as long as it is not against the law to "possess" one. That way, a kid could still be given a semi-auto as a gift from a parent who, hopefully, sets the proper rules for using it. He or she could also shoot another's legally owned semi-auto with their permission. It might decrease some of the school and other shootings but, I don't think it would make a significant difference. If the mentally unstable wants a gun, they will probably find a way to get one.

I could support this. While I have mixed feelings on raising the age to 21 for legal FFL purchases, I also know that this would not "put out" most 18 year olds who have been correctly trained in the use of firearms as they would likely have one in the family home. It would prevent 18 year olds with troubled backgrounds and family lives, who have not been taught firearms responsibility (or much of anything else in the home), from obtaining a firearm until they have 3 more years to mature. And it SHOULD (key word is should) age out some would-be school shooters.

Quote:

Was that also your opinion on long gun sales when you were 18?

As to emotional maturity and decision making, you've described quite a few 30 year olds.

To answer plainly and honestly, it wasn't something I thought about very much when I was 18. I had a .22 and a shotgun provided by my family. I suppose I would not have appreciated it to answer plainly.

As to the bold, yes you are correct... however a lot happens from 18 to 21 in many young men and women. Even though today's young adults stay home longer, stay in college longer, and start being "grown ups" later; they surely still mature a fair bit in those 3 years. I know I did. A LOT!

FITASC · February 21, 2018, 09:31 AM

Quote:

As to emotional maturity and decision making, you've described quite a few 30 year olds.

With the lack of intelligence, common sense and maturity, maybe moving driving, guns, voting and everything else to 30 should be considered. What would the libs do without all of those teens and 20 somethings voting for them?

But it's "for the children" after all............ (snarky rant off)

In The Ten Ring · February 21, 2018, 05:34 PM

Anyone that thinks being through basic training somehow makes that person more of a "man" than someone who hasn't has some fantasy and prejudice going on in their minds.

You are a "man" because of how you treat others, put their needs ahead of yours, and how you handle yourself in situations where the right thing to do will only get you fined, hurt, or killed. You don't need a stripe on your sleeve to be that kind of person. I think the military can help but it's not a prerequisite.

I'm fine with the age of "adulthood" being increased if it applies across the board. If it applies only to gun ownership then it's just one more prejudice forced onto the people.

Further and this is the real crux of the matter.....is it "immature" or "a thing of youth" to murder people? Is that normal for a 20 year old to kill classmates but not normal for a 21 year old? Of course not. The shooter knew he was committing murder so raising the age of rifle ownership would have zero effect.

TXAZ · February 21, 2018, 06:38 PM

I’ll disagree Ten Ring. With age *usually* comes an incremental rise in maturity.

Why do most car rental companies refuse or charge more if the driver is under 25?

It certainly isn’t because they have faster reactions.

FITASC · February 21, 2018, 06:46 PM

Sorry TXAZ - most meth/crack heads seem to be in their mid 20s-30s and are about as useful to society as the flu....

TXAZ · February 21, 2018, 07:13 PM

Irrelevant Fitasc.

I’m pretty sure crack and meth heads have nothing to do with the school shootings. And probable don’t rent many cars (stealing may be a different story.)

Bartholomew Roberts · February 21, 2018, 08:34 PM

Is anyone wondering why NRA supported congresscritters who completely control the legislative process are discussing what type of new restrictions they'll pass when they haven't passed a single pro-RKBA bill with majorities in the House and Senate and the man who spoke at the 2016 NRA convention in the White House?

MagnumWill · February 21, 2018, 08:51 PM

Not in the slightest, Bart. If they were capable of giving us everything we’ve asked for, then why would we need to support them? They know we fight the hardest when we’re on the threshold of a breakthrough... so why not move the goalposts...?

Webleymkv · February 21, 2018, 10:51 PM

I'll go along with raising the minimum age to purchase a gun only if the age of legal adulthood is raised along with it. If 18-20-year-olds aren't intellectually and emotionally mature enough to be trusted with a firearm, then how can we expect them to be legally responsible for themselves?

Mike38 · February 21, 2018, 10:56 PM

This is the same Federal Government that will gladly give an 18 year old a M4 and send him 8-10,000 miles around the globe to kill people, but now wants this same 18 year old to wait 3 years to buy one privately?

doofus47 · February 22, 2018, 01:27 AM

I think that a separation of age limit between bolt action rifles and semi rifles is over due.

I don't think a raised age limit will solve all problems, but it can't hurt.

I don't think it will buy the 2A camp any allies when the next shooting happens with semi auto pistols, pellet guns or bolt action rifles but it's the first "sensible" gun law I've heard--not a blanket ban for no reason related to the facts of an incident but a raised age requirement for a device that should have a more thoughtful driver at the helm.

HiBC · February 22, 2018, 02:58 AM

You cannot fool-proof life. The next school shooter is out there,and it will happen again.
And no law that they pass will stop it.
Fires in public buildings used to be a major concern.I have never heard of a modern fire tragedy in a public school.
That's because the school itself is protected against fire. And it did not require outlawing matches and Bic lighters.Non flammable construction,sprinkler systems,fire exits and drills,inspections. We invest in fire safe schools. That is the answer.
Drive by your local schools when the weather gets nicer.Count the doors propped open. So much for one secure entrance. The teachers defeat the security strategy for an open door.
Gun laws on top of gun laws have been ineffective,and they will continue to fail as long as government agencies,like the Air Force with the domestic violence discharge and the FBI with this Florida shooting. Columbine,plenty of forewarning. Nidal at Ft Hood was a known problem.
My tinfoil hat opinion,? I'm convinced Fast and Furious was designed to create international tragedy and outrage in Mexico to facilitate a restrictive arms treaty.Another attempt to defeat the 2A. Loss of life in Mexico? A shrug,and "By any means necessary"
It does not matter what laws you have,if they are enforced by bureaucrats who don't take action,they will be ineffective.
After the revelations of late regarding the politicization ,corruption,and weaponization of federal agencies,I would not put anything past them.

I'm not making any accusation of conspiracy,but my confidence in our political figures is so low that it would not surprise me a bit ,not one bit,if the decision was made to just do nothing to prevent the school tragedy. I'm not suggesting the shooting was planned,but the "ball dropping"may have been a political decision.
Let it happen for the political fuel going into the election. Sorry,but our Fed Gov't agencies and politics have earned that lack of confidence

Bump stocks? I think bump stocks are a stupid way to waste ammunition. I think laws against bump stocks are a political waste of time. A distraction.
IMO,if anything,while the bump stock made more noise and terror,I don't know that the tragedy at Los Vegas would have been less if there were no bump stocks.

18 years old? I'm thinking the status of 18 year olds is a broader subject.Its not a gun thing.I do not think politicians should be able to pick and choose a cafeteria menu of 18 year old privileges to suit political agenda.

If you can say an 18 year old has to register for selective service,and can die on the beaches of Normandy,or Iwo Jima,or at the Chosin Reservoir,Mogadeshu,Khe San,or Falluja be sent on multiple deployments to the Middle East,or some unknown assignment in Africa,..or if they can hold a loaded rifle guarding a nuclear armed B-52 ,wintertime,in Minot,North Dakota.then they are old enough.
AND if they are still kids, if they are not old enough,lets stop sending them to war till they are 21

If they are not mature and responsible enough to buy a rifle,they are not mature and responsible enough to be an easily manipulated voter. Raise the voting age to 21.

And if an 18 year old can get married and start a family,don't tell them they have no right to be armed to defend that family.
Or,take marriage away till 21.

Its not about tipping the next election with angry 18 year old voters. That is the political game being played.
It disgusts me.

zukiphile · February 22, 2018, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HiBC

If they are not mature and responsible enough to buy a rifle,they are not mature and responsible enough to be an easily manipulated voter. Raise the voting age to 21.

And if an 18 year old can get married and start a family,don't tell them they have no right to be armed to defend that family.
Or,take marriage away till 21.

Its not about tipping the next election with angry 18 year old voters. That is the political game being played.
It disgusts me.

I agree. If the sentiment were genuine that 18, 19 and 20 year olds were so irresponsible that they should be prohibited from buying the device related to an explicit civil right, we should also allow them to annul contracts made prior to 21 and prohibit them from voting.

I suspect that the sentiment isn't genuine, but that this three year population is seen as small enough that treating them as less than full citizens will have little political consequence.

Prndll · February 22, 2018, 09:39 AM

It might actually be a good thing to raise the minimum age for marriage to 21.

Life has changed.

Lohman446 · February 22, 2018, 09:44 AM

Quote:

It might actually be a good thing to raise the minimum age for marriage to 21.

Life has changed.

I'm all for this. A lot has changed. But if we are raising the age of majority it must be applied to everything: VOTING, civil contracts, military service, police service, TRUCK rental, etc.

We are telling kids they are not old enough to buy and responsibly use a firearm but they are welcome to join the military, become police officers, take out tens of thousands of dollars in student debt, vote for individuals in charge of our police and military, enter marriage, and various other major life changing decisions.

February 20, 2018, 11:58 PM	#1
In The Ten Ring Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2018 Posts: 380	Trump looking to increasing rifle age purchase limit. I'm not a fan of the article so don't assume I support this. https://nypost.com/2018/02/20/trump-...steps-on-guns/ The very fact he is discussing such things is disturbing......my first thoughts on Trump may have indeed been correct (Dem in GOP clothing).

February 21, 2018, 12:02 AM	#2
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	I don’t have a problem with it. After working with teenage boys for more than a decade, I’d proffer there are a fair percentage of them that at 18, are not mature enough to make many decisions alone, particularly when it comes to dealing with anger and interpersonal issues. __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

February 21, 2018, 02:03 AM	#6
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,833	I just saw the late news segment on Trump's statement. I find the choice of language interesting. He said that his administration had conducted an investigation to see if bump stock devices like the one used in the Vegas shooting were legal under current law. He did NOT say they were illegal. He said the ATF is going to propose a regulation change.... He also mentioned raising the age limit to purchase to 21... The devil, of course is in the details, and we will have to wait a little bit before we see what is actually proposed. He's against anything that would turn a regular rifle into a machinegun. Here's where the serious risk comes in. Expect to kiss "bump stocks" goodbye, but bumpfire stocks are a novelty item. A fun range toy, but their use in Vegas is their death warrant in the public mind. And, personally, I prefer them to "grab" (restrict/[prohibit) bump stocks, rather than the semi auto rifles they fit on. Despite the fact that it is wrong, in principle, I don't think there's any saving that particular baby this time. If we "give" them bump stocks, its possible the wolves will lose momentum. Because, they won't rest until they get something...and the longer they chase the sleigh howling, the bigger the pack gets. And, its a sad fact but our system that when enough people demand something be done, something will be done, and politicians tend to listen to the loudest voices, and the wolves howl louder than we do. The serious risk to our continued ownership of semi autos will be in the exact language used in the proposed regulation about "things that turn ordinary rifles into machineguns". Rate of fire is almost certainly a term that will be used. Personally, I think it will probably used in such a way that it will could be interpreted to our detriment. Rate of fire covers both the cyclic rate of the firearm, and the rate a skilled user can fire it. Depending on what the language of the proposed regulations are, they could have huge unintended consequences. As far as raising the legal age to purchase a rifle, that was set in law in 1968. The President cannot change that. Its not a regulation, its a law. Congress can change the law, the President cannot. But, he can ask for the change, and sign it, if Congress passes a new law. We need to look closely at what is actually proposed, not what is talked about in sound bytes. Whether or not Trump "betrays" any promise or not is not the issue to be concerned about here. There's other places for that. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

February 21, 2018, 06:38 PM	#14
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	I’ll disagree Ten Ring. With age usually comes an incremental rise in maturity. Why do most car rental companies refuse or charge more if the driver is under 25? It certainly isn’t because they have faster reactions. __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

February 21, 2018, 06:46 PM	#15
FITASC Senior Member Join Date: December 6, 2014 Posts: 6,446	Sorry TXAZ - most meth/crack heads seem to be in their mid 20s-30s and are about as useful to society as the flu.... __________________ "I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa

February 21, 2018, 12:09 AM	#3
rkammer Member Join Date: February 10, 2008 Location: Central Florida Posts: 66	I could agree with banning the sale of semi-auto rifles to under 21 persons as long as it is not against the law to "possess" one. That way, a kid could still be given a semi-auto as a gift from a parent who, hopefully, sets the proper rules for using it. He or she could also shoot another's legally owned semi-auto with their permission. It might decrease some of the school and other shootings but, I don't think it would make a significant difference. If the mentally unstable wants a gun, they will probably find a way to get one.

February 21, 2018, 01:19 AM	#4
Prndll Senior Member Join Date: July 24, 2017 Location: Texas Posts: 123	A better description would be a Rep in conservative clothing. In light of what just happened in Florida and everything else going on, I'm good with the idea. Those that are under 21 that want the responsibility that comes with a firearm can inlist.

February 21, 2018, 01:37 AM	#5
LogicMan Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2013 Posts: 280	The problem with these seemingly simple gun control proposals is that you get a Feinstein who decides to write it in such a way that it encompasses a lot of other stuff as well, which then gets the bill killed. For example, I've seen some in the media saying, in regards to will there be some type of gun control passed now, "They couldn't even get bump stock legislation passed after the Las Vegas shooting..." well that's because Feinstein went and wrote it where it bans bump stocks and any device that allows you to fire the weapon more quickly. Which means bump stocks and probably every aftermarket trigger you could buy. So not surprisingly, the legislation was heavily resisted and died. A proposed piece of legislation that only banned bump stocks and only raised the age to purchase semiautomatic firearms to 21 might have a shot at passing (I am not saying I am okay with banning bump stocks, just explaining what I see as maybe plausible as passable legislation).

February 21, 2018, 03:29 AM	#7
s3779m Senior Member Join Date: November 12, 2012 Location: Lometa, Texas Posts: 341	There are worse things President Trump could propose. I would guess congress will jump on this band wagon. Here in Texas you have to be 21 to buy a handgun so I guess this would not be that different. 18 year old's could still buy rifles. But what I have against this proposal is it too is blaming the gun and not the person firing it. There have been other shootings where the shooter was over 21 so this would not have had any affect, nor will it stop the next shooting, leading to another "talk" about more laws. I would have preferred President Trump to address the need to do away with gun free zones, including ALL FEDERAL LAND and buildings. I would have liked to see the President encourage people to take training on how to be more effective in self defense and to encourage communities to look for means to PROTECT the children instead of looking to take away rights. We, as a people, will not solve this by looking to the federal government for answers. Too many of them have stated over and over that their goal is to take away guns, you can not solve this problem talking to them.

February 21, 2018, 09:19 AM	#10
Lohman446 Senior Member Join Date: April 22, 2016 Posts: 2,192	At 18 are you an adult or are you not? If you are not old enough to be trusted with a gun how can we possibly trust you with a VOTE? Likewise how can we compel through the draft to military service? Can we even accept those that volunteer for the same? Can we hold obligation to civil contracts? Can we allow you to go $50K (or more) into debt for education? I'm fine with the discussion but the discussion needs to be about moving up the age of majority. This "your a citizen with full obligation but not full rights" is not a path I want to start on. *Yes I realize that handgun sales already fall under such a circumstance. I'm less concerned about alcohol sales and consumption as they are not mentioned as individually protected rights in the Constitution. Obviously those behind the Whiskey rebellion would disagree with the distinction but that is a foot note in history.

February 21, 2018, 05:34 PM	#13
In The Ten Ring Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2018 Posts: 380	Anyone that thinks being through basic training somehow makes that person more of a "man" than someone who hasn't has some fantasy and prejudice going on in their minds. You are a "man" because of how you treat others, put their needs ahead of yours, and how you handle yourself in situations where the right thing to do will only get you fined, hurt, or killed. You don't need a stripe on your sleeve to be that kind of person. I think the military can help but it's not a prerequisite. I'm fine with the age of "adulthood" being increased if it applies across the board. If it applies only to gun ownership then it's just one more prejudice forced onto the people. Further and this is the real crux of the matter.....is it "immature" or "a thing of youth" to murder people? Is that normal for a 20 year old to kill classmates but not normal for a 21 year old? Of course not. The shooter knew he was committing murder so raising the age of rifle ownership would have zero effect.

February 21, 2018, 07:13 PM	#16
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	Irrelevant Fitasc. I’m pretty sure crack and meth heads have nothing to do with the school shootings. And probable don’t rent many cars (stealing may be a different story.) __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

February 21, 2018, 08:34 PM	#17
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Is anyone wondering why NRA supported congresscritters who completely control the legislative process are discussing what type of new restrictions they'll pass when they haven't passed a single pro-RKBA bill with majorities in the House and Senate and the man who spoke at the 2016 NRA convention in the White House?

February 21, 2018, 08:51 PM	#18
MagnumWill Senior Member Join Date: March 18, 2009 Location: Central Colorado Posts: 1,001	Not in the slightest, Bart. If they were capable of giving us everything we’ve asked for, then why would we need to support them? They know we fight the hardest when we’re on the threshold of a breakthrough... so why not move the goalposts...? __________________ Those who hammer their swords into plow shares will plow for those who didn't...

February 21, 2018, 10:51 PM	#19
Webleymkv Senior Member Join Date: July 20, 2005 Location: Indiana Posts: 10,446	I'll go along with raising the minimum age to purchase a gun only if the age of legal adulthood is raised along with it. If 18-20-year-olds aren't intellectually and emotionally mature enough to be trusted with a firearm, then how can we expect them to be legally responsible for themselves?

February 21, 2018, 10:56 PM	#20
Mike38 Senior Member Join Date: December 28, 2009 Location: North Central Illinois Posts: 2,710	This is the same Federal Government that will gladly give an 18 year old a M4 and send him 8-10,000 miles around the globe to kill people, but now wants this same 18 year old to wait 3 years to buy one privately?

February 22, 2018, 01:27 AM	#21
doofus47 Senior Member Join Date: June 9, 2010 Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent Posts: 2,483	I think that a separation of age limit between bolt action rifles and semi rifles is over due. I don't think a raised age limit will solve all problems, but it can't hurt. I don't think it will buy the 2A camp any allies when the next shooting happens with semi auto pistols, pellet guns or bolt action rifles but it's the first "sensible" gun law I've heard--not a blanket ban for no reason related to the facts of an incident but a raised age requirement for a device that should have a more thoughtful driver at the helm. __________________ I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.

February 22, 2018, 02:58 AM	#22
HiBC Senior Member Join Date: November 13, 2006 Posts: 8,286	You cannot fool-proof life. The next school shooter is out there,and it will happen again. And no law that they pass will stop it. Fires in public buildings used to be a major concern.I have never heard of a modern fire tragedy in a public school. That's because the school itself is protected against fire. And it did not require outlawing matches and Bic lighters.Non flammable construction,sprinkler systems,fire exits and drills,inspections. We invest in fire safe schools. That is the answer. Drive by your local schools when the weather gets nicer.Count the doors propped open. So much for one secure entrance. The teachers defeat the security strategy for an open door. Gun laws on top of gun laws have been ineffective,and they will continue to fail as long as government agencies,like the Air Force with the domestic violence discharge and the FBI with this Florida shooting. Columbine,plenty of forewarning. Nidal at Ft Hood was a known problem. My tinfoil hat opinion,? I'm convinced Fast and Furious was designed to create international tragedy and outrage in Mexico to facilitate a restrictive arms treaty.Another attempt to defeat the 2A. Loss of life in Mexico? A shrug,and "By any means necessary" It does not matter what laws you have,if they are enforced by bureaucrats who don't take action,they will be ineffective. After the revelations of late regarding the politicization ,corruption,and weaponization of federal agencies,I would not put anything past them. I'm not making any accusation of conspiracy,but my confidence in our political figures is so low that it would not surprise me a bit ,not one bit,if the decision was made to just do nothing to prevent the school tragedy. I'm not suggesting the shooting was planned,but the "ball dropping"may have been a political decision. Let it happen for the political fuel going into the election. Sorry,but our Fed Gov't agencies and politics have earned that lack of confidence Bump stocks? I think bump stocks are a stupid way to waste ammunition. I think laws against bump stocks are a political waste of time. A distraction. IMO,if anything,while the bump stock made more noise and terror,I don't know that the tragedy at Los Vegas would have been less if there were no bump stocks. 18 years old? I'm thinking the status of 18 year olds is a broader subject.Its not a gun thing.I do not think politicians should be able to pick and choose a cafeteria menu of 18 year old privileges to suit political agenda. If you can say an 18 year old has to register for selective service,and can die on the beaches of Normandy,or Iwo Jima,or at the Chosin Reservoir,Mogadeshu,Khe San,or Falluja be sent on multiple deployments to the Middle East,or some unknown assignment in Africa,..or if they can hold a loaded rifle guarding a nuclear armed B-52 ,wintertime,in Minot,North Dakota.then they are old enough. AND if they are still kids, if they are not old enough,lets stop sending them to war till they are 21 If they are not mature and responsible enough to buy a rifle,they are not mature and responsible enough to be an easily manipulated voter. Raise the voting age to 21. And if an 18 year old can get married and start a family,don't tell them they have no right to be armed to defend that family. Or,take marriage away till 21. Its not about tipping the next election with angry 18 year old voters. That is the political game being played. It disgusts me. Last edited by HiBC; February 22, 2018 at 03:13 AM.

February 22, 2018, 09:39 AM	#24
Prndll Senior Member Join Date: July 24, 2017 Location: Texas Posts: 123	It might actually be a good thing to raise the minimum age for marriage to 21. Life has changed.