Ammo For Sale

« « “Senior news analyst” | Home | Oops » »

18-20 year old gun ban upheld

By the fifth circuit. Here’s an interesting bit:

It also said that the nation’s founders and 19th-century courts and commentators believed that disarming specific groups did not trample on the right to bear arms

Really? Like black people or Muslims?

15 Responses to “18-20 year old gun ban upheld”

  1. Kristophr Says:

    18 to 20 year olds weren’t always considered adults.

    Extending the voting franchise to them was a very recent thing.

    Yes, the .gov has the power to forbid unsupervised access of weapons to children, felons, and the clinically insane.

    I suggest updating the GCA instead.

  2. RedDog Says:

    Yet we will send them to war with machine guns in hand

  3. Ted N Says:

    Can’t drink, can’t own your own weapons, but would you pretty please drive down that road until you explode?

    Yep, makes sense.

  4. Chris Says:

    Ya if you read the decision, they found many examples where the term “Minor” and the term “infant” was historically used to describe someone under 21. And there is apparently plenty of historical examples of this being permitted as a restriction.

    This is a law that is going to have to be changed by legislation and not by the courts.

  5. Kristophr Says:

    Didn’t say it made sense.

    Did say that the decision followed precedent.

    Like I said: Fix the GCA or ’68.

    Or pass a law specifically stating that 18 year olds are full citizens, and that any aged based discrimination against them is exactly that.

  6. John Smith. Says:

    Got to keep those Blacks I mean people under 21 from owning guns… Judges quoting Jim Crow laws in modern times… I guess what is old is new again…

  7. Kristophr Says:

    John Smith: Sixteen year olds are not allowed to vote either … that doesn’t mean they are slaves.

    I could care less where the line is set. The Court doesn’t either.

    It just needs to be evenly applied.

  8. Sigivald Says:

    Contra John Smith, there’s a huge difference between this and Jim Crow laws – everyone is at some point between the ages of 18 and 21, regardless of race, religion, wealth, or any other factor.

    Just as everyone is ineligible to be a Representative until they’re 25, but that is in no meaningful way comparable to a provision saying “only white people or Protestants can be Representatives”.

    The ban on Federally licensed sales to 18-21 year olds is probably bad policy – and at very least not very helpful – but it just ain’t Jim Crow-level badness.

    I am entirely unsurprised at the Court’s decision, given precedent and history – and I don’t mean “the history of the 20th century and the wave of gun control then”.

    (See pp. 21 ff. in the decision; it’s not like they just waved some hands and said “any group ban is okay because groups!”.)

  9. GOLD Says:

    Intersting. The 5th Circuit is supposed to be one of the most conservative in the country.

  10. John Smith. Says:

    Oh I see… Separate But “EQUAL”….

  11. Paul Says:

    “It also said that the nationís founders and 19th-century courts and commentators believed that disarming specific groups did not trample on the right to bear arms”

    Well yea, it didn’t trample on the rights of those who could keep their guns, but it sure did on the ones that had their rights denied!

    To deign one group of citizens is to deign all the citizens.

  12. Michael D. Gale Says:

    It’s almost as if they wanted to provide a constitutional basis for an appeal to a higher court don’t you think?

  13. Kristophr Says:

    John Smith:

    So, you are OK with children getting voting rights, or five year olds buying pistols at a 7-11?

    What kind of ultra-libertarian lunatic are you?

    There are age limits on behavior and rights allowed to infants. Yes, there are irregularities on what the age limit is. And they should be fixed and set to a single age in the US.

    But claiming that limiting children’s rights because of their age is somehow “slavery” is just brain-burning stupidity.

  14. John Smith. Says:

    Taking it to the Extreme as usual K…. You have a set of laws where when you turn 18 you can fight and die in them military yet you cannot own a handgun until you are 21???? Even if you have KILLED people with them in military service… You as your custom is conducts HYPERBULLSHIT in order to make the people who disagree with you look unbalanced by reverting to EXTREMES!… Between the ages of 18-21 you have LIMITED RIGHTS… Even though you are LEGALLY and ADULT you only have LIMITED RIGHTS!!!!! Separate but EQUAL….

  15. John Smith. Says:

    Oh and ONLY YOU have made any statement about giving guns to Children… If you are old enough to serve you are old enough to have a Pistol!!