Raising the age to purchase/own

[Tom Servo]

People do not automatically become an adult the instant they turn 18 except in a legal sense.

Then at what age do they become adults? 21? 34? 40?

If 18-year-olds aren't mature enough to handle a firearm, then it's our society and parenting skills that need serious examination, not our gun laws.

[FITASC]

18 year olds are mature enough to handle automatic weapons, use artillery, and a lot more.

The school shooting issues are not because of the age of the person, but the lack of parenting, unaddressed mental issues - and in the FL case, a complete failure by three different GOVERNMENT agencies.........you know, the ones who say you don't need a gun they'll protect you?

[Dusty Rivers]

These are all very interesting points of view that cause a reasonable person to ponder their merits. This is why little if anything constructive gets done after a shooting. This is also why the constitution and bill of rights are so important, and the need for a difficult process to change them. Heavy debate needs to be done prior. Good input gang!

My concern is we are discussing the school shootings like the only people that might do such a evil act is also an american citizen governed by our laws. What happens when we add in the outside threat of terrorists? The best solution is to harden the schools as best as possible for all threats. That is best done at the local level with protection as close to the schools as possible. We are not going to be able to screen them for mental stability, or age are we? We are not going to get them to honor gun free zones and we are not going to be able to keep black market weapons, or trucks out of their hands. School protection needs to address all potential bad guys (woops bad people).

Please make sure our solutions address all potential acts as much as possible. The world is a dangerous and a wonderful place with no safe zones.

Thanks for an interesting civil discussion. Spread your thoughts. They all have valid points. The NRA was not the BG, the young man is.

[Don P]

I was wondering how many incidences there have been where the shooter bought an AR or AK legally and was under the age of 21? Are we going to alter the second amendment protection because of 1 person, or have there been many?

I think the question is silly. There is no age stipulation written into in the second amendment. So I will pose this question. Using your analogy a 6 or 10 year old should be able to purchase a weapon because of the 2 ND. amendment?????

[Lohman446]

If someone cannot be trusted with a firearm they must not be trusted with a vote. I see the later as FAR more dangerous.

Why not a 10 year old? Not an adult under the eyes of the law either criminally (in most cases) or civilly. I see there being a clear distinction.

[Tom Servo]

If someone cannot be trusted with a firearm they must not be trusted with a vote.

The irony? Some of the commentators supporting an age-limit raise for gun purchases are now advocating to have the voting age lowered to 16.

(Normally, I'd put a little smiley emoticon after that, but...no.)

[FITASC]

If gun ownership age goes up, then so does voting, military enlistment, driving, and being considered an adult to enter contracts, etc.

[Pathfinder45]

Regarding this:

"People do not automatically become an adult the instant they turn 18 except in a legal sense."
Then at what age do they become adults? 21? 34? 40?

If 18-year-olds aren't mature enough to handle a firearm, then it's our society and parenting skills that need serious examination, not our gun laws.

In a legal sense, we have in the USA, there are at least three levels of recognized adulthood that I recall:
At 18, the individual is recognized as an adult in most aspects, excepting alcohol consumption, handgun purchases, etc.
At 21, full adulthood is generally recognized with a notable exception.
At 35, the individual could become President, regardless of their manners and how they carry themselves, if enough people vote for them.

So the law is an imperfect tool in this regard, though it generally works well enough in spite of some notable failures, that there can be a functioning society. We have to hold individuals accountable by these methods of measuring adulthood, imperfect as it may be.
Actual biological adulthood varies with the individual, but is probably less relevant than mental and emotional maturity as well as the attainment of demonstrable responsibility. Thus, a well trained 18 year old is often more competent than an untrained 35 year old.

But on gun control laws, we have always had them; the chiefest of which is the Second Amendment. All others should support and enhance it, rather than contradict it. We do need to have constructive discussions about these things so that something good can come out of these difficult days.

[Lohman446]

We do need to have constructive discussions about these things so that something good can come out of these difficult days.

I'm more than willing to have a discussion about moving up the age of buying a firearm as long as it is attached to other markers of adulthood such as voting, entering a civil contract, taking student loans, being eligible for the draft, and various other things. Restricting someone from purchasing a handgun and then allowing them to drive a full size tanker truck with dangerous chemicals for instance seems counter intuitive.

[In The Ten Ring]

I agree with Lohman (what the heck is going on??? ) raising the age limit for a gun but not for voting or driving a truck is just bias and prejudice.

There is no age limit for evil. The guy wanted to hurt people that couldn't fight back and he did.

Raising the age limit of anything assumes that it's just maturity causing acts of evil. That's a silly argument. Even more silly is assuming the Left will be satisfied with an age limit increase.

[Pathfinder45]

Other cultures have used different ages for adulthood. In the Old Testament it was 20, if I remember correctly. I like the 18/21 format that we have, but think that it needs proactive training during those three years, like mandatory, enlistment in a choice of citizen services with non-military and National Guard options, etc.

[5whiskey]

If someone cannot be trusted with a firearm they must not be trusted with a vote. I see the later as FAR more dangerous.

Agree 100%. To the dismay of many of my fellow Americans were they to read that I actually believe voting in an uneducated and irrational manner is more dangerous than owning a firearm; I offer one example.

ADOLF HITLER WAS ELECTED

And more people subsequently died because of this one event than all the firearm deaths in America... EVER... since the country was founded. Including deaths as a result from the Civil War and the Revolutionary War. Conservative estimates put the death toll from WWII, including all civilian deaths, military deaths, Jewish deaths, etc. at 50 million.

[doofus47]

If the age limit for purchasing a rifle were raised moderately--with exceptions for those serving in a branch of the military--I could accept that. It was a different world when 18 was set as the minimum age for rifle purchase. 18 year olds, even when I was a kid, were often working full-time jobs and some were married (by choice, even!). Now, 18 is just the age of a final year of school and the general expectation level seems only to be that they shouldn't post anything too stupid on social media using their gift Iphone.

If the voting age were moved up as part of a package deal, I would be okay with that also.

[cdoc42]

Take a 16 year old and put him into a war environment and watch how quickly he becomes 21.

How many WWII bomber pilots were 18--19?

We have coddled and protected our youth to the extent that it would be a time consuming exercise to determine of they were capable of emulating the demand on youth in 1942. They would all be thrown into the requirement pool and final assessment would be as it was it WWII, at the end of the conflict, with awards given to those who surfaced to success, and renowned acknowledgement to those who failed to return.

Nothing has changed. We have not yet been challenged to the same extreme.

[Aguila Blanca]

So they want to raise the age to buy a rifle to 21, and lower the age for voting to 16?

That makes perfect sense. [/sarcasm]

[WV_gunner]

shall not infringed

18 you are an adult, good enough. I owned 5 guns at 18, I never done anything illegal with them. But I never bought any at a store. They were actually gifts over the years. My son, 4, has a gun even. Sure it’s locked in my safe but it is his. And except for hunting, I don’t see him ever using it to kill anything. He’s already been shooting guns. I’ve got a Remington semi auto .22 and a RG .22 revolver he’s shot. At the age of 10 I had my own hunting rifle and had access to a half dozen guns. Dad kept them in a gun cabinet in the hallway with the key in it. The difference is I knew better. I never wanted to hurt anyone with a gun.

[Lohman446]

I don't understand how we (those opposed to further restriction on single right items such as firearms) can lose this discussion

Person A: I think we should raise the age of owning a gun to 21

"WE": I agree. For whatever reason, and not blaming anyone, 18 year olds are viewed differently by society today then they were in decades and generations past. Today most 18 year olds still have a lot of growing up to do. 21 might be a good starting point. In fact I think most neurological information we have today indicates the brain doesn't really stabilize until the mid twenties so we should definitely be exploring if 21 is even the correct number. We should definitely raise the age of majority of full citizenship to 21. Maybe even 25.

Person A: Yeh, see, you get it. "Common-sense" gun laws. What do you mean by the age of majority?

"WE": Well your right about the development of our youth and how times have changed. For all the reasons we should change the age for access to full rights we should do so for other life altering decisions and responsibility: the draft, military service, civil contracts and loans, student loans, voting

Person A: Umm. I only mean firearms.

"WE": Why is development fundamentally different for firearms to restrict one right and not others? Doesn't "common sense" hold that changes in development should be considered across the board?

[Evan Thomas]

I've deleted a couple of posts. We're a firearms forum -- the general ills of society are off-topic here.

[Danoobie]

OF COURSE! Why didn't we see it before, when it was right in front of our faces the whole time! NOBODY over 21 ever does anything wrong...

[NWPilgrim]

Originally Posted by Lohman446

I don't understand how we (those opposed to further restriction on single right items such as firearms) can lose this discussion



Person A: I think we should raise the age of owning a gun to 21



"WE": I agree. For whatever reason, and not blaming anyone, 18 year olds are viewed differently by society today then they were in decades and generations past. Today most 18 year olds still have a lot of growing up to do. 21 might be a good starting point. In fact I think most neurological information we have today indicates the brain doesn't really stabilize until the mid twenties so we should definitely be exploring if 21 is even the correct number. We should definitely raise the age of majority of full citizenship to 21. Maybe even 25.



Person A: Yeh, see, you get it. "Common-sense" gun laws. What do you mean by the age of majority?



"WE": Well your right about the development of our youth and how times have changed. For all the reasons we should change the age for access to full rights we should do so for other life altering decisions and responsibility: the draft, military service, civil contracts and loans, student loans, voting



Person A: Umm. I only mean firearms.



"WE": Why is development fundamentally different for firearms to restrict one right and not others? Doesn't "common sense" hold that changes in development should be considered across the board?

Great argument! If the age limit is raised it should be raised for everything considered "adult". Firearms, smokes, alcohol, weed if allowed in your state, VOTING, signing contracts, getting marriage license on your own, draft, winning lottery, gambling, etc. Perfect!

I don't know how it can be argued a person is mature enough to vote but not to buy a gun.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

I don't understand how we (those opposed to further restriction on single right items such as firearms) can lose this discussion

Person A: I think we should raise the age of owning a gun to 21

"WE": I agree. For whatever reason, and not blaming anyone, 18 year olds are viewed differently by society today then they were in decades and generations past. Today most 18 year olds still have a lot of growing up to do. 21 might be a good starting point. In fact I think most neurological information we have today indicates the brain doesn't really stabilize until the mid twenties so we should definitely be exploring if 21 is even the correct number. We should definitely raise the age of majority of full citizenship to 21. Maybe even 25.

Person A: Yeh, see, you get it. "Common-sense" gun laws. What do you mean by the age of majority?

"WE": Well your right about the development of our youth and how times have changed. For all the reasons we should change the age for access to full rights we should do so for other life altering decisions and responsibility: the draft, military service, civil contracts and loans, student loans, voting

Person A: Umm. I only mean firearms.

"WE": Why is development fundamentally different for firearms to restrict one right and not others? Doesn't "common sense" hold that changes in development should be considered across the board?

I'm sure you somehow think this would end the discussion, but you'd be wrong about that. There's nothing wrong with a tiered system that grants rights with varying degrees of responsibility based on age. We already do that when it comes to alcohol. An 18 year old, while considered old enough for such things as owning property, voting, entering into legal contracts, etc., is not considered old enough to purchase or consume alcohol.

Also, as I pointed out in another post, the military is all about training and development. Under supervision and direction, 18 year old recruits are trained in the use of firearms. They are also taught discipline, decision making, the importance of following established procedures and regulations--all of which serves to mold them into good soldiers and responsible adults . It's not as if they're handed an M16 and then left on their own.

So, no, a one-size-fits-all approach to rights and responsibility doesn't make "common sense".

[Lohman446]

I missed the mention of alchohol in the Constitution. Giving someone the right to vote but not own a gun is troubling at best. Remember you have a responsibility to the country, eligibility for draft into the military, that is a major indication of adulthood. The military and its trading aside depriving someone of the right to effective self defense while requiring them to participate in the draft indicates giving up to their life without volunteering, indicates no rights are individual in nature

[SonOfScubaDiver]

But it does make provision for regulating those rights.

[Lohman446]

I think there is a difference between regulation based on age and denial based on age. I have to look at the arguments around alcohol. I think it’s fundamentally different but we should at least be able to glean the arguments of why 21? I think we need to make sure to tie voting and gun rights together in the same argument with age increases though. Voting is far more powerful.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

I think we could address the voting issue by placing more emphasis on civics during the high school years. I've been of the opinion for several years now that our educational system is at the core of many of the societal problems we're currently dealing with, including these shootings. Today's children turn 18 with just a cursory understanding of our political system and the power we have as citizens because we can vote. There's an old saying--A house cannot be built on sand.

You make a good point about regulation vs. denial. Maybe what needs to happen is something along the lines of only allowing those between 18-21 to buy single shot low powered rifles that wouldn't be very effective if used in mass shooting scenarios. They'd have to wait until turning 21 for the high powered and semi-automatic rifles. The single shot rules could also apply to shot guns. They'd be limited in choices for hunting purposes, but they'd still have some options. If similar rules were adopted for handguns, then they could get 22 revolvers at 18 instead of having to wait until turning 21 to buy them.