18 to 20 year olds still second class citizens

tennmike

http://townhall.com/news/us/2012/10/25/court_upholds_ban_on_handgun_sales_to_people_under_21?page=1

By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) - The United States may ban federally licensed firearms dealers from selling handguns to people under age 21, an appeals court ruled on Thursday, in a defeat for the National Rifle Association.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Houston rejected the NRA's argument that 18- to 20-year-olds had a right to buy the guns under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment.

A unanimous three-judge panel said Congress, in a law dating from 1968, adopted the sales ban to help curb violent crime. 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.

Another brick in the Second Amendment chipped away in 1968 that needs to be replaced in the wall.

Teach

I wonder if the NRA will push it to the Supreme Court? If not, maybe a more effective bunch like GOA will take up the challenge.
Jerry

CaliFFL

Then Selective Service should only apply to 21+ year olds.

An adult can't buy a handgun, but they can be conscripted and issued one. Yeah, that sounds like Liberty.

tennmike

Jerry, I'm hoping that the NRA and GOA, and every other 2nd Amendment supporting organization gets on this appeal and rams it into the Supreme Court docket. The law was stupid when it was enacted, and is even more stupid now. 18-20 y.o. enjoy all other rights and privileges of being an adult except this one, and ,alcohol purchasing in most places.

Why was it stupid when enacted? I couldn't legally buy a pistol when I was in the Navy the first couple of years, but I could shoot the snot out of any intruder with the one I was issued and carried on an average of two 4-hour watches per day. If I was adult enough to carry one unrestricted as part of my job then, I should have been able to purchase one for myself. Either you IS, or you AIN'T. And 18-20 y.o. can still buy all the shotguns and rifles that the traffic will bear. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Over.

SideOfBacon

This is utterly ridiculous! "disarming specific groups" are you KIDDING ME!? What's next? Groups that like semi-automatic weapons?
(I guess I should stop before I give anyone ideas...)

bhl2506

tennmike wrote: »

Jerry, I'm hoping that the NRA and GOA, and every other 2nd Amendment supporting organization gets on this appeal and rams it into the Supreme Court docket. The law was stupid when it was enacted, and is even more stupid now. 18-20 y.o. enjoy all other rights and privileges of being an adult except this one, and ,alcohol purchasing in most places.

Why was it stupid when enacted? I couldn't legally buy a pistol when I was in the Navy the first couple of years, but I could shoot the snot out of any intruder with the one I was issued and carried on an average of two 4-hour watches per day. If I was adult enough to carry one unrestricted as part of my job then, I should have been able to purchase one for myself. Either you IS, or you AIN'T. And 18-20 y.o. can still buy all the shotguns and rifles that the traffic will bear. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Over.

I always did think that law was a bunch of horse excrement. If you are old enough to get drafted and shot at in the military then you are old enough to buy a firearm. Yeah I know not all 18 to 20 year olds are mature enough but how many rights are going to be restricted for the few.

woodsrunner

Hey Mike!.... there probably aren't 3-4 people on the Forum that will recognize your " Flaghoist" :tooth:! But I was there.....just a few years before you....and I also stood those watches (before I was 21 years old) armed with a 1911, serial # 2120807 and two CLIPS of ammo! :usa:

SirGeorgeKillian

I thought the sell of a handgun was illegal by an FFL to someone under 21 already? Did I read something wrong?

CaliFFL

SirGeorgeKillian wrote: »

I thought the sell of a handgun was illegal by an FFL to someone under 21 already? Did I read something wrong?

It is. The court simply upheld that portion of the GCA.

The United States may (is allowed to) ban federally licensed firearms dealers from selling handguns to people under age 21,

CaliFFL

SideOfBacon wrote: »

This is utterly ridiculous! "disarming specific groups" are you KIDDING ME!? What's next? Groups that like semi-automatic weapons?

Conservative white males that like semi-automatic weapons....

Teach

Wasn't the 14th. Amendment passed in part because "specific groups" were being disarmed? What a bunch of hypocrites!
Jerry

tennmike

SirGeorgeKillian wrote: »

I thought the sell of a handgun was illegal by an FFL to someone under 21 already? Did I read something wrong?

It has been illegal since GCA1968. It is immoral for this nation to allow anyone less than the legal age join the military, but disallow them the same rights as anyone the arbitrary legal age. At 18 you can sign a contract for just about anything imaginable, are considered an adult by the law for any offenses committed, and can buy as many long arms for which you can beg, borrow, or steal the money. But you can't buy a pistol until you're 21. Can't buy alcohol until you're 21.

The judges that came down with this decision should be charged with violation of the rights of the citizens affected, and also be charged with subversion(treason against) of the Constitution of the United States. A judge that can't read the simple language of the Constitution has no business judging whether or not a thing is legal vis the Constitution.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
14th Amendment
Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

A law that does not apply to all citizens equally is not a law at all; it is an affront to our liberty, our rights guaranteed in the Constitution, and a plain and simple case of discrimination that violates the 14th Amendment.

horselips

Unfortunately for 18-20 year olds aspiring to own handguns, the courts have a lot of established precedent when it comes to the graduated, progressive age of majority. We start with the age of sexual consent (14-18), followed by the age of driving (15-17), then comes the age of majority (18) when one can vote, work dangerous jobs, enter into contracts, own longarms, and can no longer be charged or tried as a juvenile, followed by the age (21) of being allowed to possess and consume alcohol and handguns, and finally the age (35) of presidential eligibility. The customary ages for conscription are 18-60, however any government reserves the right to conscript anyone and everyone regardles of age or gender in defense of the state. (example: During WW2, Parliament passed a law placing every British subject's life, property and talent at the disposal of the Crown. The law has never been repealed. The Windsors don't eff around.)

Anyway, there is no clear-cut all-encompasing age of adulthood that gives blanket permission/eligibility for everything. I personally hold that the right to self-defense with any legal firearms should be acknowledged at 18.