Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
- knockonit
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 3549
- Joined: May 23rd, 2018, 3:23 pm
- Reputation: 23
- Location: Phoenix,
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
amazing, simply amazing the though process of some folks, liberalism, alive and well. its infected so many websites i have frequented over the decades, i'm old and old fashion, and not in style. have decided its not worth my time to attempt to educate anyone for any reason, just read the horsefeathers and giggle or shake me head and look elsewhere for a bonified conversation worth having
have a good weekend
rj
have a good weekend
rj
- paulgt2164
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 789
- Joined: July 1st, 2018, 9:40 am
- Reputation: 17
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
knockonit wrote: ↑June 11th, 2022, 4:52 pm amazing, simply amazing the though process of some folks, liberalism, alive and well. its infected so many websites i have frequented over the decades, i'm old and old fashion, and not in style. have decided its not worth my time to attempt to educate anyone for any reason, just read the horsefeathers and giggle or shake me head and look elsewhere for a bonified conversation worth having
have a good weekend
rj
At least it has been rather good at outing a few dingleberries here.
- knockonit
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 3549
- Joined: May 23rd, 2018, 3:23 pm
- Reputation: 23
- Location: Phoenix,
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
lol, yeah, you can spot them if you pay attention to their posts, they all tend to step on their hootenanny eventually, their stance shows up
, lol, so be it, life is full of bullshite, just gotta wade thru it for the good parts. lol
Rj
, lol, so be it, life is full of bullshite, just gotta wade thru it for the good parts. lol
Rj
- oldslurrydog1
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 1241
- Joined: February 8th, 2021, 2:32 pm
- Reputation: 0
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
Charles Whitman. I guess he's considered the first mass school shooter. Look up his weapons.AZ_Five56 wrote: ↑June 10th, 2022, 5:31 pm This gun control is only going to continue to ratchet up further and further until they come for all of the guns if people have that attitude. These gun grabbers want them ALL, and they're taking them away incrementally. As soon someone uses a scoped bolt action to go around killing people, they'll call them sniper rifles and want those gone as well. You have to draw a line in the sand.
There used to be info about the students grabbing thier guns from thier dorms and shooting suppression fire to help the police gain entry into the tower.
Thanks to Google, that info has been erased.
Found it.
https://apps.texastribune.org/guns-on-c ... s-whitman/
"Regular people from all over Austin had grabbed their guns from their trucks or homes that day and rushed to campus to fire at Whitman from the ground. Their bullets pelted the tower, kicking up clouds of limestone. At times, witnesses said, the campus felt like a war zone, but with armed frat boys and hunting enthusiasts instead of soldiers.
“There were lots of people carrying guns, mostly young men, mainly rifles,” said Ann Major, who was a senior at the time."
"Forrest Preece, who was stuck in a drugstore on Guadalupe Street, said he remembers seeing two students running across the porch of their fraternity house carrying rifles."
- Quake_Guy
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 61
- Joined: June 25th, 2018, 9:43 pm
- Reputation: 0
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
As someone mentioned, why no outrage for handguns being legal at age 21? You gotta pick a year unless you think 13 year olds buying handguns without an adult present is a great idea. Some of you probably do, you just need to realize how disconnected you are from the reality that most children are raised in nowadays.
In the olden days Hemmingway could roam Northern Michigan by himself with a 22 pistol strapped to his hip before he was 10 years old. But guess what, the olden days are gone. The maturity level of young adults is way less than it was even 20-30 years ago. Part of the blame is that we raised the age on everything else, treat young people like infants and you get infants. Other part is the social structure around people has crumbled, that isn't coming back.
Even Florida bans all gun purchases until the age of 21. You can either try to standardize at the Federal level or the states will implement even more restrictive measures. As far as being a Fudd, LOL, far from it. No, I'm just an adult who realizes the world isn't black and white.
In the olden days Hemmingway could roam Northern Michigan by himself with a 22 pistol strapped to his hip before he was 10 years old. But guess what, the olden days are gone. The maturity level of young adults is way less than it was even 20-30 years ago. Part of the blame is that we raised the age on everything else, treat young people like infants and you get infants. Other part is the social structure around people has crumbled, that isn't coming back.
Even Florida bans all gun purchases until the age of 21. You can either try to standardize at the Federal level or the states will implement even more restrictive measures. As far as being a Fudd, LOL, far from it. No, I'm just an adult who realizes the world isn't black and white.
- kenpoprofessor
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 2028
- Joined: July 22nd, 2018, 4:10 am
- Reputation: 3
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
Quake_Guy wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 12:19 pm As someone mentioned, why no outrage for handguns being legal at age 21? You gotta pick a year unless you think 13 year olds buying handguns without an adult present is a great idea. Some of you probably do, you just need to realize how disconnected you are from the reality that most children are raised in nowadays.
In the olden days Hemmingway could roam Northern Michigan by himself with a 22 pistol strapped to his hip before he was 10 years old. But guess what, the olden days are gone. The maturity level of young adults is way less than it was even 20-30 years ago. Part of the blame is that we raised the age on everything else, treat young people like infants and you get infants. Other part is the social structure around people has crumbled, that isn't coming back.
Even Florida bans all gun purchases until the age of 21. You can either try to standardize at the Federal level or the states will implement even more restrictive measures. As far as being a Fudd, LOL, far from it. No, I'm just an adult who realizes the world isn't black and white.
You're a FUDD, however you try to rationalize your statements.
Clyde
- BigNate
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 654
- Joined: July 5th, 2020, 5:56 pm
- Reputation: 4
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
Because "frog in the pot" - it is "normal" to them so they don't see the need to fight it (and I'll admit - I'm infected with that same disease). You are right - we should be just as frustrated by this as we are the attempts to remove the right to buy certain rifles.QuietM4 wrote: ↑June 10th, 2022, 3:46 pm I'm curious of all of those opposed to a 21+ age requirement for AR type rifles; where is your outrage and loud vocal opposition for the age requirement for the purchase of handguns/frames/receivers?
Of all the various boards I visit multiple times per day, there isn't a single thread about fighting the age requirement for pistols...why not?
Did any of you follow the Natalia Marshall v ATF/DOJ case from last year?
That said - I gifted each of my children a handgun at 18, and before they turned 21 they could buy 9mm for them by invoking the fact (true) that we owned 9mm PCCs and the cartridge was a carbine cartridge. MOST gun store guys would grin and promptly sell them rounds.
- BigNate
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 654
- Joined: July 5th, 2020, 5:56 pm
- Reputation: 4
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
OK - I'm going to wade into this one and I'll probably catch some crap for some of this - but I think its worth discussing...
1) I think that preventing 18 year old people from buying an AR pattern rifle is simply stupid. I think that preventing 18 year olds from buying any semi-auto rifle is only slightly less stupid. While I don't support any restrictions as they are written, I think that getting some form of gun safety prior to buying your first firearm is a good thing - but I can't support legislating this because the 2nd Amendment says "shall not be infringed." There are things that I think are a good idea - that I truly believe would do much good - but that would also infringe on the liberties of law abiding citizens and the value of that liberty is greater than whatever good would come of the restriction. As a society we've generally determined that the age of majority in our country is 18. If we think that folks are not mature enough to own a rifle at 18 - maybe we raise the age of majority for everything to 21. Want to vote, join the military, etc... 21. Yeah... nah... I don't think so. Maybe we just put more energy into turning out 18 year old citizens who are responsible and educated about guns.
2) I think background checks are a good thing but I don't support expanding them. My lack of support for expansion of background checks comes from the fact that I simply don't trust government and I believe sincerely that at a minimum they WANT to use this information to catalog gun ownership and identify gun owners - and maximally they are actively doing this under the guise of some national security directive - but as a precursor for efforts to confiscate guns if they believe that they have the political will to do so. If there were a mechanism by which I could be assured that the background check was ONLY used to prevent sales to prohibited possessors - and that absolutely zero record of the purchase was to be kept or shared with the government - then I'd be more inclined to support expanded checks - but today I don't.
3) I support putting more energy, effort and public money into early intervention for mental illness and for stripping the right to own guns from those who have been shown to be seriously mentally ill AND prone to violence. The bar here needs to be REALLY high - and I'm not sure how to objectively set such a bar in a way that protects those who don't present an immediate threat - but I do think that putting energy into preventing access to guns by people with serious mental illness is something worth working on. However this happens, it must include due process - it needs to go through the courts and be done in a manner that complies with the constitutional protections of individual liberties. This is one of those areas where even though I do support "something" I hesitate to say that I support it because I fear it's abuse by those who would use it to disarm people in general - you know - the types who would point to the owning of more than a gun or two as an evidence of a mental imbalance.
4) Red Flag Laws - Like #2 above - I'm truly torn. Are there people who are imbalanced, who make genuine threats, and who actually have the propensity to kill the person that they are mad at even though they have not yet committed a crime? Yep? Are there people who will vindictivly falsify threats in order to get their estranged spouse disarmed. Yep. This is one of those areas where I don't have a good answer because unhinged people do evil things. That said - while removing a raging, unhinged person's access to firearms may make them somewhat less immediately dangerous, it does not make them harmless. The best answer to this sort of issue, in my opinion, is for folks to be prepared and skilled in defending themselves. Making it easy to disarm someone without due process is something too easily abused.
At the end of the day - my view on these things boils down to a few principles:
* Evil exists and taking tools away from good people does nothing to prevent evil - rather - it advances the cause of the evil doer by weakening the ability of the victims to protect themselves.
* Liberty is more important than government-provided security.
* Portions of our population are completely willing to ignore the constitutional protections of our God-given liberties in order to either feel safe, or worse yet, advance an agenda that centralizes power in government and removes the ability of the citizen to defend themselves against evil, whether that be a street criminal, or the government. These attempts must be resisted...
1) I think that preventing 18 year old people from buying an AR pattern rifle is simply stupid. I think that preventing 18 year olds from buying any semi-auto rifle is only slightly less stupid. While I don't support any restrictions as they are written, I think that getting some form of gun safety prior to buying your first firearm is a good thing - but I can't support legislating this because the 2nd Amendment says "shall not be infringed." There are things that I think are a good idea - that I truly believe would do much good - but that would also infringe on the liberties of law abiding citizens and the value of that liberty is greater than whatever good would come of the restriction. As a society we've generally determined that the age of majority in our country is 18. If we think that folks are not mature enough to own a rifle at 18 - maybe we raise the age of majority for everything to 21. Want to vote, join the military, etc... 21. Yeah... nah... I don't think so. Maybe we just put more energy into turning out 18 year old citizens who are responsible and educated about guns.
2) I think background checks are a good thing but I don't support expanding them. My lack of support for expansion of background checks comes from the fact that I simply don't trust government and I believe sincerely that at a minimum they WANT to use this information to catalog gun ownership and identify gun owners - and maximally they are actively doing this under the guise of some national security directive - but as a precursor for efforts to confiscate guns if they believe that they have the political will to do so. If there were a mechanism by which I could be assured that the background check was ONLY used to prevent sales to prohibited possessors - and that absolutely zero record of the purchase was to be kept or shared with the government - then I'd be more inclined to support expanded checks - but today I don't.
3) I support putting more energy, effort and public money into early intervention for mental illness and for stripping the right to own guns from those who have been shown to be seriously mentally ill AND prone to violence. The bar here needs to be REALLY high - and I'm not sure how to objectively set such a bar in a way that protects those who don't present an immediate threat - but I do think that putting energy into preventing access to guns by people with serious mental illness is something worth working on. However this happens, it must include due process - it needs to go through the courts and be done in a manner that complies with the constitutional protections of individual liberties. This is one of those areas where even though I do support "something" I hesitate to say that I support it because I fear it's abuse by those who would use it to disarm people in general - you know - the types who would point to the owning of more than a gun or two as an evidence of a mental imbalance.
4) Red Flag Laws - Like #2 above - I'm truly torn. Are there people who are imbalanced, who make genuine threats, and who actually have the propensity to kill the person that they are mad at even though they have not yet committed a crime? Yep? Are there people who will vindictivly falsify threats in order to get their estranged spouse disarmed. Yep. This is one of those areas where I don't have a good answer because unhinged people do evil things. That said - while removing a raging, unhinged person's access to firearms may make them somewhat less immediately dangerous, it does not make them harmless. The best answer to this sort of issue, in my opinion, is for folks to be prepared and skilled in defending themselves. Making it easy to disarm someone without due process is something too easily abused.
At the end of the day - my view on these things boils down to a few principles:
* Evil exists and taking tools away from good people does nothing to prevent evil - rather - it advances the cause of the evil doer by weakening the ability of the victims to protect themselves.
* Liberty is more important than government-provided security.
* Portions of our population are completely willing to ignore the constitutional protections of our God-given liberties in order to either feel safe, or worse yet, advance an agenda that centralizes power in government and removes the ability of the citizen to defend themselves against evil, whether that be a street criminal, or the government. These attempts must be resisted...
- paulgt2164
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 789
- Joined: July 1st, 2018, 9:40 am
- Reputation: 17
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
Umm... Plenty of us are outraged at that - you live under a rock?Quake_Guy wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 12:19 pm As someone mentioned, why no outrage for handguns being legal at age 21? You gotta pick a year unless you think 13 year olds buying handguns without an adult present is a great idea. Some of you probably do, you just need to realize how disconnected you are from the reality that most children are raised in nowadays.
In the olden days Hemmingway could roam Northern Michigan by himself with a 22 pistol strapped to his hip before he was 10 years old. But guess what, the olden days are gone. The maturity level of young adults is way less than it was even 20-30 years ago. Part of the blame is that we raised the age on everything else, treat young people like infants and you get infants. Other part is the social structure around people has crumbled, that isn't coming back.
Even Florida bans all gun purchases until the age of 21. You can either try to standardize at the Federal level or the states will implement even more restrictive measures. As far as being a Fudd, LOL, far from it. No, I'm just an adult who realizes the world isn't black and white.
Sorry, but after your comment about supporting "trading" our rights for lower drinking age or some such total b.s. you can't backtrack from that. You seem content in a consulation prize in exchange for more "death by a thousand cuts" right-infringement legislation. In that same post you comment about lowering the drinking age, and that people below 21 should be more concerned with "chasing tail" - yet here are now talking about how the maturity level today is was less than it was previous - all kind of contradictory there aren't we?
There is black and white - and that is our rights. If your 13 year old can't handle the responsibility of a firearm - then that is a parental failing, plain and simple.The amount of 13 years old these days that can go out and drop several hundred bucks on a handgun is pretty much zero - so if you a parent who takes their kid to a gun store, and gives them the money to buy a gun (assuming your hypothetical comment above)and they aren't mature enough - how is that a failing of anything other than you as a parent? Maybe you should muzzle your kids, and take away their phones/computers/etc too, if they say things you don't agree with as well? Since you are so happy to bargain away our rights - why stop at the 2nd?
Last edited by paulgt2164 on June 16th, 2022, 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- kenpoprofessor
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 2028
- Joined: July 22nd, 2018, 4:10 am
- Reputation: 3
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
Well reasoned arguments, well said sir. I may not agree with all that you've written, but you bring your reasons according to your logic, not your emotions. The other guy is a FUDD, 100%.BigNate wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 3:25 pm OK - I'm going to wade into this one and I'll probably catch some crap for some of this - but I think its worth discussing...
1) I think that preventing 18 year old people from buying an AR pattern rifle is simply stupid. I think that preventing 18 year olds from buying any semi-auto rifle is only slightly less stupid. While I don't support any restrictions as they are written, I think that getting some form of gun safety prior to buying your first firearm is a good thing - but I can't support legislating this because the 2nd Amendment says "shall not be infringed." There are things that I think are a good idea - that I truly believe would do much good - but that would also infringe on the liberties of law abiding citizens and the value of that liberty is greater than whatever good would come of the restriction. As a society we've generally determined that the age of majority in our country is 18. If we think that folks are not mature enough to own a rifle at 18 - maybe we raise the age of majority for everything to 21. Want to vote, join the military, etc... 21. Yeah... nah... I don't think so. Maybe we just put more energy into turning out 18 year old citizens who are responsible and educated about guns.
2) I think background checks are a good thing but I don't support expanding them. My lack of support for expansion of background checks comes from the fact that I simply don't trust government and I believe sincerely that at a minimum they WANT to use this information to catalog gun ownership and identify gun owners - and maximally they are actively doing this under the guise of some national security directive - but as a precursor for efforts to confiscate guns if they believe that they have the political will to do so. If there were a mechanism by which I could be assured that the background check was ONLY used to prevent sales to prohibited possessors - and that absolutely zero record of the purchase was to be kept or shared with the government - then I'd be more inclined to support expanded checks - but today I don't.
3) I support putting more energy, effort and public money into early intervention for mental illness and for stripping the right to own guns from those who have been shown to be seriously mentally ill AND prone to violence. The bar here needs to be REALLY high - and I'm not sure how to objectively set such a bar in a way that protects those who don't present an immediate threat - but I do think that putting energy into preventing access to guns by people with serious mental illness is something worth working on. However this happens, it must include due process - it needs to go through the courts and be done in a manner that complies with the constitutional protections of individual liberties. This is one of those areas where even though I do support "something" I hesitate to say that I support it because I fear it's abuse by those who would use it to disarm people in general - you know - the types who would point to the owning of more than a gun or two as an evidence of a mental imbalance.
4) Red Flag Laws - Like #2 above - I'm truly torn. Are there people who are imbalanced, who make genuine threats, and who actually have the propensity to kill the person that they are mad at even though they have not yet committed a crime? Yep? Are there people who will vindictivly falsify threats in order to get their estranged spouse disarmed. Yep. This is one of those areas where I don't have a good answer because unhinged people do evil things. That said - while removing a raging, unhinged person's access to firearms may make them somewhat less immediately dangerous, it does not make them harmless. The best answer to this sort of issue, in my opinion, is for folks to be prepared and skilled in defending themselves. Making it easy to disarm someone without due process is something too easily abused.
At the end of the day - my view on these things boils down to a few principles:
* Evil exists and taking tools away from good people does nothing to prevent evil - rather - it advances the cause of the evil doer by weakening the ability of the victims to protect themselves.
* Liberty is more important than government-provided security.
* Portions of our population are completely willing to ignore the constitutional protections of our God-given liberties in order to either feel safe, or worse yet, advance an agenda that centralizes power in government and removes the ability of the citizen to defend themselves against evil, whether that be a street criminal, or the government. These attempts must be resisted...
Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day
Clyde
- BigNate
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 654
- Joined: July 5th, 2020, 5:56 pm
- Reputation: 4
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
A few questions for you...
As I read through the Constitution of the United States, nowhere do I find that any of the three branches of the federal government is expressly granted authority to "standardize at the federal level" our gun laws. In fact - I find this little nugget that seems to actually preclude the state's rights asserted in Amendment X from being asserted to pass "even more restrictive measures:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - Amendment II
Some things ARE black and white. Even if we don't like it.
Just suggesting that taking the attitude that we can make the words mean whatever we find convenient today - is a recipe for disaster.
Here you imply that because a portion of our society has failed in parenting we should restrict the liberty of those young men and women who were well raised. From the perspective of the constitution I only see one option and that is to raise the age of majority. If we said that a person is not an "adult" until 21 then that would leave the individual under their parent's authority until that point of their life. I'm assuming that you don't want to do this? Otherwise, what you are saying is that because some people are not trained well as children, all people between 18-21 need to have their rights restricted. I can't go there with you. My kids were safer, more skilled, and more respectful towards firearms at 13 than about 50% of the people that I see at Ben Avery on a Saturday morning. Why should they have their rights infringed upon because other knuckleheads fail their children?Quake_Guy wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 12:19 pm As someone mentioned, why no outrage for handguns being legal at age 21? You gotta pick a year unless you think 13 year olds buying handguns without an adult present is a great idea. Some of you probably do, you just need to realize how disconnected you are from the reality that most children are raised in nowadays.
In the olden days Hemmingway could roam Northern Michigan by himself with a 22 pistol strapped to his hip before he was 10 years old. But guess what, the olden days are gone. The maturity level of young adults is way less than it was even 20-30 years ago. Part of the blame is that we raised the age on everything else, treat young people like infants and you get infants. Other part is the social structure around people has crumbled, that isn't coming back.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Amendment XQuake_Guy wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 12:19 pm Even Florida bans all gun purchases until the age of 21. You can either try to standardize at the Federal level or the states will implement even more restrictive measures. As far as being a Fudd, LOL, far from it. No, I'm just an adult who realizes the world isn't black and white.
As I read through the Constitution of the United States, nowhere do I find that any of the three branches of the federal government is expressly granted authority to "standardize at the federal level" our gun laws. In fact - I find this little nugget that seems to actually preclude the state's rights asserted in Amendment X from being asserted to pass "even more restrictive measures:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - Amendment II
Some things ARE black and white. Even if we don't like it.
Just suggesting that taking the attitude that we can make the words mean whatever we find convenient today - is a recipe for disaster.
- kenpoprofessor
- ArizonaShooting.org Member
- Posts: 2028
- Joined: July 22nd, 2018, 4:10 am
- Reputation: 3
- Location: Phoenix
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
BigNate wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 4:10 pm A few questions for you...
Here you imply that because a portion of our society has failed in parenting we should restrict the liberty of those young men and women who were well raised. From the perspective of the constitution I only see one option and that is to raise the age of majority. If we said that a person is not an "adult" until 21 then that would leave the individual under their parent's authority until that point of their life. I'm assuming that you don't want to do this? Otherwise, what you are saying is that because some people are not trained well as children, all people between 18-21 need to have their rights restricted. I can't go there with you. My kids were safer, more skilled, and more respectful towards firearms at 13 than about 50% of the people that I see at Ben Avery on a Saturday morning. Why should they have their rights infringed upon because other knuckleheads fail their children?Quake_Guy wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 12:19 pm As someone mentioned, why no outrage for handguns being legal at age 21? You gotta pick a year unless you think 13 year olds buying handguns without an adult present is a great idea. Some of you probably do, you just need to realize how disconnected you are from the reality that most children are raised in nowadays.
In the olden days Hemmingway could roam Northern Michigan by himself with a 22 pistol strapped to his hip before he was 10 years old. But guess what, the olden days are gone. The maturity level of young adults is way less than it was even 20-30 years ago. Part of the blame is that we raised the age on everything else, treat young people like infants and you get infants. Other part is the social structure around people has crumbled, that isn't coming back.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Amendment XQuake_Guy wrote: ↑June 16th, 2022, 12:19 pm Even Florida bans all gun purchases until the age of 21. You can either try to standardize at the Federal level or the states will implement even more restrictive measures. As far as being a Fudd, LOL, far from it. No, I'm just an adult who realizes the world isn't black and white.
As I read through the Constitution of the United States, nowhere do I find that any of the three branches of the federal government is expressly granted authority to "standardize at the federal level" our gun laws. In fact - I find this little nugget that seems to actually preclude the state's rights asserted in Amendment X from being asserted to pass "even more restrictive measures:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - Amendment II
Some things ARE black and white. Even if we don't like it.
Just suggesting that taking the attitude that we can make the words mean whatever we find convenient today - is a recipe for disaster.
NOT FUDD talk, thank you. Again, well articulated. You probably won't change his opinion with all that logic and reasoning, it's better to just call a FUDD a FUDD and ignore what they say.
Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day
Clyde
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
what about the 19 yr old single mom that cant afford to move out of a bad hood? what about her rights? this is bullshit- fuds justifying it on every news channel- im glad im old and closer to death- f*** bullshit
-
- ArizonaShooting.org Silver Supporter
- Posts: 528
- Joined: May 25th, 2018, 6:37 pm
- Reputation: 15
- Location: Mesa
Re: Changing AR15 Purchase Age to 21
I'll admit, I was totally unaware of the Natalia Marshall court case, but the ruling was very favorable to the 2A community.
https://nypost.com/2021/07/13/appeals-c ... year-olds/
Not being a lawyer, so the government passes the bullshit law stating the age limit being raised to 21 for an AR purchase, how long before it is appealed?
Just like all the "knee jerk" gun laws the mayor is running through in NY. She damn well knows they will not be upheld come appeal time.
https://nypost.com/2021/07/13/appeals-c ... year-olds/
Not being a lawyer, so the government passes the bullshit law stating the age limit being raised to 21 for an AR purchase, how long before it is appealed?
Just like all the "knee jerk" gun laws the mayor is running through in NY. She damn well knows they will not be upheld come appeal time.