Gunman kills 19 children, 2 adults in Texas grade school

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Xerxes

I agree. Why block folks from buying a gun at 18, when they can just join the military and use even more dangerous munitions.

True, but in the military there is dicipline, training and consequences.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by MaDef

If you want my support for that, then the age of majority should be raised accordingly, that includes joining the military, voting, and entering legally binding contracts, etc.

If I’m not mistaken the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in 1971 because the U.S. was drafting 18 year olds and many thought they should at least be able to vote. Which incidentally Democrats controlled both houses then.

The speedy action occurred in response to a 5-4 decision in 1970 by U.S. Supreme Court that struck down a law aimed at accomplishing the same result. Justice Hugo Black wrote in the majority opinion: “I would hold that Congress has exceeded its powers in attempting to lower the voting age in state and local elections.”

On June 22, 1970, in signing the age-lowering law, Nixon had voiced “misgivings” about its constitutionality. He directed Attorney General John Mitchell “to cooperate fully in expediting a swift court test of the constitutionality of the 18-year-old provision.”

The Vietnam War served as a catalyst for action; young men who were ineligible to vote were being drafted without a direct vote over the politicians who sent them to war. “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote,” the law’s proponents argued.

The slogan was first heard during World War II, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt lowered the military draft age to 18. (another democrat )

As an independent I think an 18 year old should still be allowed to vote and continue to be allowed to volunteer to defend their country. Like Buddahaid alluded to there is everything what a young man or women requires in the armed forces of the United States, 3 hots and a cot, guidance, purpose, discipline, consequences, reward. Lord knows it helped me, plus I didn’t purchase my first firearm until I was 24. It’s not like everyone has to buy one as soon as they turn 18.

I also think there is nothing wrong with an able 18 year old man or woman to lawfully enter into legal binding contracts. That is part of learning responsibility.

Hopefully by the time a young man or women turns twenty one they will have enough REAL life experiences and hopefully gain an appreciation for life. And if they choose to purchase a firearm they will at least have a record for the great god of comprehensive background checks to reveal if they qualify or not to purchase a firearm. I could be wrong but I think background checks on 18 year olds are pointless because I think their juvenile criminal records are sealed.

I only offer theses ideas because it seems a few parents can’t raise their children right.

My only question: do you think the ideas are reasonable?

Funny everything I said reminds me of movie Starship Troopers, carry on citizen

[Xerxes]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

True, but in the military there is dicipline, training and consequences.

Most gun owners have discipline and training. Every ND or illicit action with a gun has consequences.

[Ostfriese]

Originally Posted by Xerxes

Most gun owners have discipline [...]

So do most video game players, yet the video games have been pushed to the block.



At least nobody has been stupid enough to follow Ted Cruz' "unlocked back door" BS...

[Ostfriese]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

I won't argue with that but I think those requirments will never get through Congress and even if they did the Supreme Court would kill it.

But why? From my non-American perspective Rockstar's suggestion is one that would find a broad majority among the Americans, and it even sounds reasonable from my European point of view.

[August]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Not a bad idea.

Jon Voight, Outspoken GOP Supporter, Calls For ‘Proper Qualifications for Gun Ownership’ After Uvalde Shooting

https://variety.com/2022/politics/ne...ol-1235280563/

So far I’m agreeable too the following

1. To purchase from FFL, mandatory firearm safety and practical shooting course for all types of firearms. Fees paid by applicant.

2. Raise purchase age to 21

3. One other thing, display responsibility. Must have a job and make a living wage and be owner or lessee of their own domicile. Should be relatively easy for someone to do before they reach 21.

Bums, delinquents, ne'er-do-wells, drug addicts, convicts and children need not apply.

What happens if somebody decides that you are a bum or a ne'er-do-well?

[Ostfriese]

Originally Posted by August

What happens if somebody decides that you are a bum or a ne'er-do-well?

Then you can't buy a gun.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Xerxes

Most gun owners have discipline and training. Every ND or illicit action with a gun has consequences.

Like dead children. Most in this case is nowhere near enough.

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

As an independent I think an 18 year old should still be allowed to vote and continue to be allowed to volunteer to defend their country.

My only question: do you think the ideas are reasonable?

Then they should also be allowed to "bear arms" as per the Constitution. If you are going to give them the responsibilities of an adult, they should then also have the same rights.

Criminal Background checks for initial purchase is fine, maybe even a short "waiting period" from initial purchase to possession would be ok. The others have to many loopholes or aren't really feasible here in the real world.

Something to keep in mind, a lot of firearm purchases are generated in the secondary (used market), these people are either collectors (where the firearm becomes a Safe Queen), or used by competition shooters who require multiple firearms in different calibers for different types of matches.

[Xerxes]

Originally Posted by MaDef

Then they should also be allowed to "bear arms" as per the Constitution. If you are going to give them the responsibilities of an adult, they should then also have the same rights.

Criminal Background checks for initial purchase is fine, maybe even a short "waiting period" from initial purchase to possession would be ok. The others have to many loopholes or aren't really feasible here in the real world.

Something to keep in mind, a lot of firearm purchases are generated in the secondary (used market), these people are either collectors (where the firearm becomes a Safe Queen), or used by competition shooters who require multiple firearms in different calibers for different types of matches.

I disagree with a waiting period, there have been several cases where women had abusive partners, and they couldn't get a gun to defend themselves, and were beat or killed.



Either that, or a very short period.


A note on the safe queen stuff, my father bought a M1A from a retired cop a few years back, and it's a safe princess, the real queen is a M1 Carbine that he got from CMP.

[MaDef]

I'm not a big fan of waiting periods either, but I think an exception could be made in those cases, all the person would have to do is bring in a copy of the TRO and the waiting period could be waived.

[Xerxes]

Originally Posted by MaDef

I'm not a big fan of waiting periods either, but I think an exception could be made in those cases, all the person would have to do is bring in a copy of the TRO and the waiting period could be waived.

Yeah, as long as they can get a TRO in time. Didn't think of that one.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by August

What happens if somebody decides that you are a bum or a ne'er-do-well?

Thanks for calling this out, I was about to, but you beat me to it.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Xerxes

Most gun owners have discipline and training. Every ND or illicit action with a gun has consequences.

What does 'ND' stand for here?

If it's 'neurodivergent', I'm autistic and I've been properly trained in how to handle a firearm and used one on multiple occasions. Never had any urge to go and shoot up a school.

I think the best solution is to have a gun license test - like we have for cars, aircraft, boats, working with minors, etc. etc. - that anyone can apply for and pass if they prove to be responsible and sane. Anyone who doesn't pass can then pursue legal action against the government if they feel they were discriminated against for their political beliefs, ethnicity, etc.

[MaDef]

ND stands for negligent discharge which usually occurs when a loaded firearm is mishandled.

I think the best solution is to have a gun license test - like we have for cars, aircraft, boats, working with minors, etc. etc. - that anyone can apply for and pass if they prove to be responsible and sane. Anyone who doesn't pass can then pursue legal action against the government if they feel they were discriminated against for their political beliefs, ethnicity, etc.

In the state I currently reside in, a safety certificate is required before buying a weapon, and is only good for 5 years and I am completely against this as it is a permit, and I should not have to acquire a permit to exercise a right granted by the Constitution.