Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

Dianne Feinstein wants age for rifle purchase raised to 21 y.o.

tennmiketennmike Senior MemberPosts: 27,395 Senior Member
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/feinstein-raising-assault-rife-purchase-age-to-21_us_5a87cb9ee4b004fc31924670

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announced Friday that she is introducing legislation to raise the minimum age to purchase rifles — including military-style assault weapons — from 18 to 21.

Under federal law, handguns cannot be sold to anyone under age 21. But licensed gun dealers are permitted to sell assault-style rifles and other “long guns” to buyers 18 and older.

Nikolas Cruz, the suspected gunman in Wednesday’s school shooting in Parkland, Florida, used an AR-15 assault-style rifle, according to police. He is 19 years old.

Lone gunmen in many of the most deadly mass shootings in the U.S. over the past several years, including the Las Vegas massacre on Oct. 1, were armed with similar weapons.

“Licensed gun dealers cannot sell a handgun to anyone under 21, but they are allowed to sell assault rifles like the AR-15 to anyone over 18. This policy is dangerous and makes absolutely no sense,” Feinstein said in a statement.

“If you can’t buy a handgun or a bottle of beer, you shouldn’t be able to buy an AR-15,” she continued. “This is common sense, and I hope my Republican colleagues will join me in this effort.”


Well, if this gets any traction, then NO ONE should be allowed to join the armed forces until they are 21 years old, or older. Soldiers as young as 14(and the 14 y.o. was a MOH recipient at Iwo Jima) have been fighting in wars for as long as this country has been around. If they are now deemed not mature enough to buy a rifle or handgun until they're 21, or buy a beer, then they're ALSO damned sure too young to be in the military service. This is a black and white choice; there is no gray area here. Either they are old/mature enough to buy and own them at 18, or they have no business cheating by joining the military and getting to handle/shoot them.

And while we're at it, if the age for buying/owning a rifle AND pistol is raised to 21, then the voting age should ALSO BE RAISED to 21. If you're too stupid to own either a rifle or pistol until you're 21, then you don't need to be voting and screwing up the country either!
  I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
― Douglas Adams
«13

Replies

  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    I graduated from high school, went through basic training, went through tech school, and got stationed at Eglin all before I turned 18.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • roadkingroadking Senior Member Posts: 3,056 Senior Member
    So Dianne...what's it like to "want"? Shove off hag.
    Support your local Scouts!
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 21,090 Senior Member
    roadking wrote: »
    Shove off hag.
    :win:
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 23,654 Senior Member
    Just because of who it is is enough to oppose it. It could be worse though, it could be Pelosi!
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 10,906 Senior Member
    I HATE it. My father had to sign for me to join the Army. Turned 18 in AIT, but if this and a kick in the pants for the FBI is enough, it is better than saying stick it and losing everything.

    I have also heard something about reclassifying the AR and needing to be 21 to purchase that style of rifle.

    It all sucks, but we are going to need to give something this time.
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,973 Senior Member
    I support a modification of this. Raise the age to purchase a semi auto center fire rifle to 25, unless you have completed military service and are discharge honorably.

    I personally believe that we can all make do with single shot, bolt action, lever action and pump action guns. While I like my center fire semi auto's a lot, I can see where limiting them might not be a bad thing. We should allow rimfire rifles of any type at 18, centerfire at 21. I am sure we will hear about the Kel-Tec CMR-30 being nearly as powerful as an AR 15, and we might even see copies for the under 21 / under 25 crowd.

    IMHO

    D
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,395 Senior Member
    People, people, people! Know with whom you are dealing! Since NFA we have been giving, giving, giving, and giving, and the Left calls it compromise. In a compromise, neither side gets ALL they want, but they both get something. WE have been giving the whole time and not getting a dammed thing in return. THAT IS NOT COMPROMISE! Past time to dig in heels and say HELL NO! to any more of this taking.

    BigDanS, I REALLY hope that post you made was tongue in cheek satire. And I'm sayin'.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,733 Senior Member
    If this happens, and it probably will, any one with an honorable discharge should be excepted. I think bump-stocks will be the next casualty, for which I find no sympathy.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,493 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    People, people, people! Know with whom you are dealing! Since NFA we have been giving, giving, giving, and giving, and the Left calls it compromise. In a compromise, neither side gets ALL they want, but they both get something. WE have been giving the whole time and not getting a dammed thing in return. THAT IS NOT COMPROMISE! Past time to dig in heels and say HELL NO! to any more of this taking.

    BigDanS, I REALLY hope that post you made was tongue in cheek satire. And I'm sayin'.
    It IS a compromise.


    We get to keep some of our firearms.

    Sent from my SM-S907VL using Tapatalk
    Overkill is underrated.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,733 Senior Member
    Yes, we've had bump stocks, short barreled rifles, pistols, large capacity magazines, and a whole lot of things. So to say we haven't gotten anything is specious. At any rate, no matter how much we "dig our heels in" (whatever that means) we're going to lose some things. It's beyond our power at this point to do something to prevent this.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • MichakavMichakav Senior Member Posts: 2,728 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    This won't be popular.....
    If that's ALL, I repeat ALL that comes of this, I'm fine with it. They believe it helps, and it doesn't affect me.

    Me too! As it stands nowadays I personally feel that a majority of 18 year old "millennials" don't have the maturity or life skills to purchase a firearm anyway. As stated above, that would include voting and joining the military. If that small concession lessens the screeching I am all for it.
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 10,906 Senior Member
    Tennmike, we have to give something or we may just lose all this time. I hate it, I really do

    News tonight said Trump has started action to ban bumpfire stocks
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • roadkingroadking Senior Member Posts: 3,056 Senior Member
    What's next? A ban on oxy, acetelene and contractor bags????
    Support your local Scouts!
  • FFLshooterFFLshooter Member Posts: 1,057 Senior Member
    The idiots are out in full. I can barely stand to be online or reading the news. The bleeding hearts don’t know the difference between anything. They say that we should only have hunting rifles. Apparently they’ve never done a size comparison between a 30 06 and 223. I like to ask people: “would you rather be hit by Kia sorrento or Hyundai Sonata going 65mph”? They always say “what’s it matter, it’s the same thing”. I reply: “And there’s your first lesson on the difference between hunting rifles and AR’s.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,917 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/feinstein-raising-assault-rife-purchase-age-to-21_us_5a87cb9ee4b004fc31924670

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announced Friday that she is introducing legislation to raise the minimum age to purchase rifles — including military-style assault weapons — from 18 to 21.

    Under federal law, handguns cannot be sold to anyone under age 21. But licensed gun dealers are permitted to sell assault-style rifles and other “long guns” to buyers 18 and older.

    Nikolas Cruz, the suspected gunman in Wednesday’s school shooting in Parkland, Florida, used an AR-15 assault-style rifle, according to police. He is 19 years old.

    Lone gunmen in many of the most deadly mass shootings in the U.S. over the past several years, including the Las Vegas massacre on Oct. 1, were armed with similar weapons.

    “Licensed gun dealers cannot sell a handgun to anyone under 21, but they are allowed to sell assault rifles like the AR-15 to anyone over 18. This policy is dangerous and makes absolutely no sense,” Feinstein said in a statement.

    “If you can’t buy a handgun or a bottle of beer, you shouldn’t be able to buy an AR-15,” she continued. “This is common sense, and I hope my Republican colleagues will join me in this effort.”


    Well, if this gets any traction, then NO ONE should be allowed to join the armed forces until they are 21 years old, or older. Soldiers as young as 14(and the 14 y.o. was a MOH recipient at Iwo Jima) have been fighting in wars for as long as this country has been around. If they are now deemed not mature enough to buy a rifle or handgun until they're 21, or buy a beer, then they're ALSO damned sure too young to be in the military service. This is a black and white choice; there is no gray area here. Either they are old/mature enough to buy and own them at 18, or they have no business cheating by joining the military and getting to handle/shoot them.

    And while we're at it, if the age for buying/owning a rifle AND pistol is raised to 21, then the voting age should ALSO BE RAISED to 21. If you're too stupid to own either a rifle or pistol until you're 21, then you don't need to be voting and screwing up the country either!

    There is one argument here as I see it......in the military, there is generally some adult supervision involved in weapons handling. Even when I went in at 17 in 1969 weapons and ammo were very tightly controlled. ( Not talking about combat)

    The long and the short of this is.... something is going to be done...if an age restriction and a bump stock ban is the extent of it.....so be it....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • terminator012terminator012 Senior Member Posts: 3,929 Senior Member
    Diver43 wrote: »
    Tennmike, we have to give something or we may just lose all this time. I hate it, I really do

    News tonight said Trump has started action to ban bumpfire stocks

    I heard Trump had done this too. If that's all we loose I'm ok with it. I fear that won't be all though.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,917 Senior Member
    Another thing....perhaps this will shut the "do something" crowd up.....at least until they figure out that those steps didn't work either....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    The only thing the age limit would have stopped is possibly this jackass in Florida, but it should have been stopped in the first place but the ball was dropped-- just another regulation or protocol that we won't foll0ow through on is meaningless and we can't follow through on what is existing as is. Banning bump stocks wouldn't have stopped the Vegas shooter. Age limits wouldn't have stopped Columbine or Sandy Hook. Nothing will be accomplished other than our rights being slowly taken away.

    What happens when the next one happens? (And it will) What are we going to give them then? The answer is we will keep giving them stuff until there is nothing left to give.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,493 Senior Member
    If I remember correctly, a lot of the Vegas shooter's rifles were jammed, no? If he hadn't have been using bump stocks, he might have killed or wounded more people.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    What do we get in return? Bending over and taking it doesn't sound like the best way to win a war. I can see a compromise for the greater good, but this doesn't look like one.

    And if we had a president Clinton, all you guys would be screaming "cold dead hands".
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    So we give them the age limit thing for suppressors and enhanced background checks for national reciprocity. Everyone still walks away like something was done.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    Buy me dinner. Reach around the aisle instead of across the aisle.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,035 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Another thing....perhaps this will shut the "do something" crowd up.....at least until they figure out that those steps didn't work either....

    Until the NEXT shooting. And you know there'll definitely be another. Then they'll want more.
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,035 Senior Member
    I heard Trump had done this too. If that's all we loose I'm ok with it. I fear that won't be all though.

    I'm glad I have all the 30 rd. mags I'll ever need. Now I need to concentrate on ammunition/reloading. I can see the grabbers coming for ammo.
  • MichakavMichakav Senior Member Posts: 2,728 Senior Member
    Until the NEXT shooting. And you know there'll definitely be another. Then they'll want more.

    They have wanted more for quite some time. They will always want more. The end game is to give up next to nothing on our part but makes them feel good.
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    What we need is a well versed orator to calmly explain the lack of effectiveness with these easy fixes when compared to the more costly but effective school security measures. Good guy with a gun etc.. Thing is it has be delivered by someone without the taint of partisanship, gun culture, politics, etc..

    Not likely I guess.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    What we need is a well versed orator to calmly explain the lack of effectiveness with these easy fixes when compared to the more costly but effective school security measures. Good guy with a gun etc.. Thing is it has be delivered by someone without the taint of partisanship, gun culture, politics, etc..

    Not likely I guess.
    That used to be the NRA. Now, they are nothing more than shills for the Republican Party.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,917 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    What we need is a well versed orator to calmly explain the lack of effectiveness with these easy fixes when compared to the more costly but effective school security measures. Good guy with a gun etc.. Thing is it has be delivered by someone without the taint of partisanship, gun culture, politics, etc..

    Not likely I guess.

    The shock from Columbine had not worn off when, at the school boards request, we presented an exhaustive list of measures that could be taken to protect our communities schools. There was all manner of head-nodding, verbal agreements, etc. Then when we got to how much all these recommendations would cost.....you could have heard a pin drop. Then the outspoken parents who were agreeing with us started in on how it sounded like we were trying to turn the schools into prisons. It will ALWAYS come down to the cash...

    Over the years since, talking with my peers in the business....they all tell the same story....

    If all those kids screaming about gun control knew that their safety had been sold out because of a lack of cash....I wonder what they would be saying....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    If you really think about it, the security details for all of these liberal politicians are primarily Republicans! Let the have liberal snowflakes to protect them and see if their attitude changes.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 12,622 Senior Member
    Give it a month.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement