Appeals Court Holds 18 to 20-year-olds Have Second Amendment Rights

[The Purge]

On 13 July, 2021, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, a three-judge panel issued an opinion that held 18-20-Year-Old people have Second Amendment rights. To people who have studied the Second Amendment and the supporting documents at the Founding, this is an unsurprising conclusion. From the decision, p. 24:

As with any matter of constitutional interpretation, “our inquiry begins with the text of the Constitution.” Altman v. City of High Point,330 F.3d 194, 200 (4th Cir. 2003). Both the text and structure of the Second Amendment, along with its place within the Constitution as a whole, reveal that it protects 18- to 20-year-olds. First, nothing in the text of the Second Amendment limits its application by age. Second, the most analogous rights to the Second Amendment, those in the First and Fourth Amendments, similarly contain no age limits. Third, most other constitutional rights are not age limited. And fourth, the few rights that may not apply to those under 18 or that change by age are not analogous to the Second Amendment, and most of those rights become applicable at age 18, not 21.

On page 29:

(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...

The opinion is beautifully written. So is the dissent. The opinion holds the Constitution must be followed. The dissent holds we must find ways to get around constitutional restraints.

If they can vote or serve in the military, they should have full rights.

The minimum age to

Buy alcohol
Buy tobacco
Buy guns
Vote
Join the Army
Rent a car
Be drafted
Serve on a jury
Get married

Should all be the same age.

 

[White 6]

On 13 July, 2021, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, a three-judge panel issued an opinion that held 18-20-Year-Old people have Second Amendment rights. To people who have studied the Second Amendment and the supporting documents at the Founding, this is an unsurprising conclusion. From the decision, p. 24:




On page 29:

(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...

The opinion is beautifully written. So is the dissent. The opinion holds the Constitution must be followed. The dissent holds we must find ways to get around constitutional restraints.

If they can vote or serve in the military, they should have full rights.

The minimum age to

Buy alcohol
Buy tobacco
Buy guns
Vote
Join the Army
Rent a car
Be drafted
Serve on a jury
Get married

Should all be the same age.

Correct. The Constitution and rule of law are still in effect.

 

[M14 Shooter]

An 18yr-old can legally purchase and possess an M-60 machine gun - how is it both necessary and effective to deny them the right to purchase a handgun?

 

[White 6]

An 18yr-old can legally purchase and possess an M-60 machine gun - how is it both necessary and effective to deny them the right to purchase a handgun?

In some states it is illegal, period to personally buy and possess a machine gun. In other, it is so government regulated, time-consuming, and expensive that it is beyond practicality for 18-year-olds to own, store, transport, and train on their personally owned machine gun. For all practical purposes you can consider it illegal in even gun friendly states for personal use, and not be too far off base.
They should not be denied the right to purchase a handgun, but even that deserves some regulation if 18 years old or older.

 

[meaner gene]

The minimum age to

Buy alcohol
Buy tobacco
Buy guns
Vote
Join the Army
Rent a car
Be drafted
Serve on a jury
Get married

Should all be the same age.

Interesting concept. Some states allow people to drive at 16 years old, but not vote until they're 18 years old.

 

[M14 Shooter]

In some states it is illegal, period to personally buy and possess a machine gun. In other, it is so government regulated, time-consuming, and expensive that it is beyond practicality for 18-year-olds to own, store, transport, and train on their personally owned machine gun.

Just like the law discussed in the OP, I'm talking about federal law.
Under federal law, any 18yo who can legally own gun can own an M60.

 

[White 6]

Just like the law discussed in the OP, I'm talking about federal law.
Under federal law, any 18yo who can legally own gun can own an M60.

What good is owning it, if you cannot take it into the state you live in or the number of hoops to jump through and pay to jump through is almost echelons above reality for 99.9% of 18-year-olds in the country? Just how many 18-year-olds do you know that legally have and train with one. Get real dude. You never wondered why. It is effectively illegal, where not strictly illegal and not at all worth the effort or expense for private ownership.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What good is owning it, if you cannot take it into the state you live in....

Fact remains:
An 18yo can legally own an M60; that he cannot wone a handgun is insane.

 

[White 6]

Fact remains:
An 18yo can legally own an M60; that he cannot wone a handgun is insane.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And yet, the fact remains.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

On 13 July, 2021, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, a three-judge panel issued an opinion that held 18-20-Year-Old people have Second Amendment rights. To people who have studied the Second Amendment and the supporting documents at the Founding, this is an unsurprising conclusion. From the decision, p. 24:




On page 29:

(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...

The opinion is beautifully written. So is the dissent. The opinion holds the Constitution must be followed. The dissent holds we must find ways to get around constitutional restraints.

If they can vote or serve in the military, they should have full rights.

The minimum age to

Buy alcohol
Buy tobacco
Buy guns
Vote
Join the Army
Rent a car
Be drafted
Serve on a jury
Get married

Should all be the same age.

Preaching to the choir.

Few if any take issue with the ruling.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Preaching to the choir.
Few if any take issue with the ruling.

^^^^
Another lie.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/18/federal-appeals-court-decisions-handguns-opens-door-more-violence/

Editorial: 18-year-olds shouldn't have the right to buy guns

A federal appeals court ruled that laws can't keep 18- to 20-year-olds from buying guns. But age restrictions for something this dangerous make perfect sense.

www.latimes.com

Opinion | Handguns for 18-Year-Olds? (Published 2010)

The N.R.A.’s argument that people 18 to 20 years old have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them in public is breathtakingly irresponsible.

www.nytimes.com

et al

 

[2aguy]

17 year olds can enlist in the military and in 14 weeks can be sent around the world to kill for the United States. When they get home they cant own a gun ro protect their family. State sanctioned killing is okay, personal defense is out of bounds…..the democrats are insane

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

^^^^
Another lie.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/18/federal-appeals-court-decisions-handguns-opens-door-more-violence/

Editorial: 18-year-olds shouldn't have the right to buy guns

A federal appeals court ruled that laws can't keep 18- to 20-year-olds from buying guns. But age restrictions for something this dangerous make perfect sense.

www.latimes.com

Opinion | Handguns for 18-Year-Olds? (Published 2010)

The N.R.A.’s argument that people 18 to 20 years old have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them in public is breathtakingly irresponsible.

www.nytimes.com

et al

Again, this is a non-issue; the court is correct, and few disagree.

Prohibiting 18- to 21-year-olds from purchasing firearms would do little reduce gun crime and violence.

That’s one of the reasons why Florida Republicans enacted the same measure after the Parkland shooting; it was a way to placate those demanding ‘something be done’ without actually doing anything.

 

[Coyote]

On 13 July, 2021, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, a three-judge panel issued an opinion that held 18-20-Year-Old people have Second Amendment rights. To people who have studied the Second Amendment and the supporting documents at the Founding, this is an unsurprising conclusion. From the decision, p. 24:




On page 29:

(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...

The opinion is beautifully written. So is the dissent. The opinion holds the Constitution must be followed. The dissent holds we must find ways to get around constitutional restraints.

If they can vote or serve in the military, they should have full rights.

The minimum age to

Buy alcohol
Buy tobacco
Buy guns
Vote
Join the Army
Rent a car
Be drafted
Serve on a jury
Get married

Should all be the same age.

I actually agree. If you are old enough to join the army and shoot a gun but not old enough to own a gun - that's a bit bizarre.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

17 year olds can enlist in the military and in 14 weeks can be sent around the world to kill for the United States. When they get home they cant own a gun ro protect their family. State sanctioned killing is okay, personal defense is out of bounds…..the democrats are insane

At least you’re consistent at being ignorant and wrong.

The 1968-gun control act concerns solely the selling of firearms by Federally licensed dealers (FFLs) to 18- to 21-year-olds; it does not prohibit 18- to 21-year-olds from possessing firearms, it does not prohibit them from purchasing firearms in a private intrastate sale with another private person, and it does not prohibit an 18- to 21-year-old from being gifted a firearm provided the 18- to 21-year-old isn’t a prohibited person.

Consequently, your post is a lie and ridiculous demagoguery - 18- to 21-year-olds have ample alternative means to lawfully acquire firearms for personal self-defense other than an FFL.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I actually agree. If you are old enough to join the army and shoot a gun but not old enough to own a gun - that's a bit bizarre.

Purchase a firearm from an FFL, actually; 18- to 21-year-olds are allowed to own/possess firearms.

But yes, the prohibition concerning FFLs is ridiculous and does little to address gun crime and violence.

And you’re with the great majority of other Americans who agree with the ruling.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Again, this is a non-issue; the court is correct, and few disagree.

I just gave you a list of disagreements,. I can give you more.

 

[woodwork201]

They should not be denied the right to purchase a handgun, but even that deserves some regulation if 18 years old or older.

No it doesn't. It deserves no regulation at all.

 

[LuckyDuck]

I've always believed that if you can serve in the military and be handed a firearm, you should be able to own one. I do believe though, that first time gun buyers should have a safety class and sign an agreement to abide by the safety rules.