Gun Rights for those 17 - 21

[RetiredGySgt]

If you are between the ages of 17 - 21 and are following all these gun control threads, there is something I would like you to consider. This isn't a debate, it's a political / legal reality so bear with me.

All of these retail establishments along with the president have decided that until you're 21 you should not own a firearm. What strikes me as odd here is that at 17 you can sign up and go into the military and defend this country, but it's another FOUR YEARS before the government thinks you ought to be able to defend your own life.

If you don't like that, you should urge all those in your age group to boycott the military until Uncle Scam gets his head out of his ..........

Virtually every election cycle when Republicans gain any power, the media and the Democrats sensationalize someone else's misery in order to sell gun control and force the Republicans to sign major gun legislation that ultimately accomplishes NOTHING.

* Under Reagan, he signed a bill to outlaw the future manufacture of fully autos for civilian use - and NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON IN AMERICA HAD DIED FROM A BULLET FIRED FROM A LEGAL FULL AUTO.
* Behind him was George Bush who banned the importation of foreign made semi-automatic firearms
* George W. Bush said he would have extended the AWB put into place by Clinton, but Congress did not give him that luxury
* Today a nitwit, double talking traitor has promised the Democrats the sun, the moon and the stars on the gun control issue - even advocating circumventing Due Process do it!!!

Every time there is a catastrophe, the Ds and Rs do their song and dance routine over gun control and every time it ends with the Ds getting compromises and more gun control. The problem is, IT DON'T SAVE LIVES.

None of the pabulum puking political propaganda prostitutes from EITHER side has informed you that IF the current laws had been followed, Adam Lanza (who committed the Sandy Hook murders) along with Nickolas Cruz would have been stopped BEFORE the carnage began. The laws were in place, but the cops didn't do their job; the county school system didn't do its job; the FBI didn't do their job. And yet NOBODY with the county faces accountability, the cop who turned tail and ran faces no accountability (Hell he gets to retire and draw a pension); the FBI gets off scott free! Why pass more laws if they don't use the current ones to prevent this crap?

Then they single out those between 17 and 21, the NRA, Republicans, conservatives and everyone else that IS NOT RESPONSIBLE. It is time for gun owners to go on the offensive and offer ways to address the issue without gun control and those of you 17 - 21 could boycott joining the armed forces until the gun control hysteria stops and the government holds those who allowed the mass shootings to happen be held accountable AND consider the proposals that would reduce gun violence without infringing on our Rights. No point in serving a country that won't serve you, but throw you under the bus instead of admitting what the world should know.

Had the government done their jobs under existing law, those children would still be alive. You should not be held accountable for the government's failure to simply do their job.

Since it’s difficult to discern from your word-salad of a post the ‘point’ you’re trying to make, we’re forced to assume that you believe prohibiting 18 to 20-year-olds from possessing firearms ‘violates’ the Second Amendment.

If that’s the case, then of course you’re wrong.

The Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of age limits with regard to possessing a firearm, and until it does, such measures would be consistent with the Second Amendment.

Actually Einstein FEDERAL LAW states that every 17 and older is a member of the unformed Militia, meaning the Federal Government has a law making it legal for 17 to 21 to own possess and have firearms.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No one is seeking to ‘dismantle’ the Second Amendment.

That's because they can't. If they could, they would. See my topic OVER ONE THIRD OF DEMOCRATS SURVEYED WANT TO REPEAL THE 2ND.

All the proposed firearm regulatory measures are perfectly consistent with current Second Amendment jurisprudence, including prohibiting those under 21 from possessing guns.

So you would have no problem if Trump and the Republicans raised the voting age to 25?

And marriage is in fact a fundamental right, not a ‘privilege’

Then why did the founders never mention it in the Constitution?

Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying were invalidated by the Supreme Court because they violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment.

We didn't have laws prohibiting queers from marrying, we just didn't respect the union is all.

Should a law be enacted prohibiting those under 21 from possessing a firearm, they are at liberty to file suit in Federal court to seek relief.

Yeah, most Americans have the millions of dollars needed to process such a case all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

[Humorme]

You can always amend the Constitution, NOT throw it under the bus with an illegal / unconstitutional act.

For me, this is simple:

Ever since the first time I voted in a presidential election, when the Republicans got in office, the liberals forced them to compromise on gun control measures. There was Reagan with his major attack on the Second Amendment. Then George Bush burned his NRA membership card (after taking their money) and banned semi-automatic imports. Bush # II was willing to reinstate the AWB despite the FACT that it did not reduce crime or shootings. On and on the game has gone on, unchallenged. What we've accomplished is tor reduce the Republic into a socialistic democracy.

While the left keeps lying about what this is really about, I'm saying this:

IF this discussion is about saving lives, then join with me and let's talk about the facts. Let's ask why we allow the criminally insane to run amok in a free society. Let's talk about the fact that for every mentally ill person in a mental institution, we have more than TEN mentally ill people in prison and when they are let out, they are more screwed up than when they went in.

Let's take about the fact that is the mentally ill who are never properly treated being the ones who commit mass shootings while the dullards keep blaming the Second Amendment.

Let's talk about the fact that the laws and controls are in place, but the system does not do their job. With the latest mass shooting, the county government did not do their job; the state did not do their job; the LEO community was absent and asleep despite the reports, complaints and the obvious warning signs after going to this guy's home repeatedly. Why are we not talking about the cop who was allowed to retire and draw a full pension? How come we are giving the FBI a free pass for sitting on their backsides and DOING NOTHING?

Every time I try to have a thread about preventative measures, we have the liberals trying to make the damn thread about a referendum on gun control. Adding insult to injury, I was working on this issue BEFORE Sandy Hook, BEFORE Lakeland, Florida. I was lobbying for the issues I brought up here a full week BEFORE Nickolas Cruz. I remain convinced that the left has no empathy and don't give two hoots in Hell about saving lives. And I'm sick and tired of the Republicans who refuse to get involved, go on the offensive and get to the root of the problem (summed up in this post.)

I know... TLDR. THAT is why we're in this shape. This time, I'm just as determined to stop crazed killers BEFORE they strike as much as the left is determined to take peoples firearms. You're not going to win that battle in my lifetime, so you are always welcome to join me in getting preventative measures in place and stop the killing BEFORE it starts. OR, you can ignore my pleas and make this a never ending referendum. Would you, as a father rather win in a popularity poll OR work for a solution we could all live with?

This time I'm speaking to those 17 - 21 years of age because the media, the left, and anti-gunners want to marginalize them and take their Rights without bothering to even have a discussion about who has been responsible for the mass shootings. Firearms are no more to blame than a car is responsible for the drunk who wrecks and kills an entire family.

Yes, you can amend the Constitution. But the way the gun people make it out, you can't do that either.

Throwing it under the bus would imply that people know what it actually means, and in my experience a lot of people will twist the meaning to fit their own agenda, on both sides.

We can talk about facts.

The facts are 4 times more people die in the US than in other First World countries from murder.

Also the US's murder rate is 3/4 gun murders.

We can talk about mental illness and why the US doesn't really deal with it effectively. Why prisons are used as places to hide those with mental problems away from society.

We can talk about education too, and why it's severely lacking.

We can also talk about how none of this is ever going to change. Firstly because the political system is so broken that only two parties ever get in and they're so corrupt that they've legitimized this corruption. Secondly that the voters don't bother to vote properly and many of them reinforce the problems in society.

Yes, we can talk all of this. But nothing will ever change, and the more shootings take place in schools and the like, the more people are going to go after guns, because those who want to keep their guns aren't willing to change society in the manner necessary to stop the killings without taking away the guns. So guns will continue to be a target.

Either America is a nation of laws or it is not. Either the United States Constitution is the law of the land OR we are just a simple democracy where a popularity contest determines right from wrong.

If you insist on taking a dump on the Constitution, then every Right you cherish is at risk.

There are two avenues here:

Continue to take people's guns away incrementally until the Constitution has NO meaning OR start doing more than having this incessantly silly conversation.

The thing of it is, that all through my life (Reagan being the first president I could vote for) the Republicans have compromised with the Democrats, giving us absolute gun control on the installment plan.

At the same time, the Democrats never sit down and negotiate with us in good faith. But, now, for me, it is really frustrating. The Republicans KNOW, for a fact, that not only did gun control NOT WORK, but there exists better ways of addressing this issue so that we reduce deaths by firearms without the standard incremental attack on the Second Amendment.

I'm mad at the Republicans for not fighting a battle based on offense (the best defense being a good offense) and sick of the gun control argument as a whole. Neither side wants to stop the carnage. That is why we never advance beyond the same, old, tired, worn out, back and forth political jockeying It's time to get the nutjobs off the streets. It's time for the left to sit down and negotiate in good faith, not try that silly mind game about asking if the public should have access to this kind of weapon or another. Between you and I that one is a no brainer.

Most honest people will acknowledge that our forefathers were predominantly Christian. So, they founded a country based on Christian values. Jesus told his apostles that they were to carry a sword even if they had to hock their robes in order to do so. Earlier, in that same book of the Bible, it admonishes us: "When a strong man armed keeps his palace, his goods are in peace (Luke 11:21) Don't you think that when Jesus said that, he could not fathom a time in the future where people would use muskets that are far more dangerous than swords? Yet II Timothy 3:16 & 17 states that "16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

We have two choices: Rid this country of guns OR keep those we KNOW that pose a threat to society in protective custody, in a supervised environment. Sandy Hook could have been prevented with the laws, tools, and technology we have in place. Nickolas Cruz in Lakeland, Florida could have been stopped with the laws, tools, and technology we have in place. So could many other mass shooters been stopped before the carnage began. It's time to hold others accountable.

I agree.

The problem is that rights are being dumped on ALL THE DAMN TIME in the US.

Take laws that prevent gay people from getting married. The right doesn't have a problem with dumping the shit out of this one, does it?

So, if the right has a problem with gay marriage then, you support dismantling the Second Amendment in retaliation?

I do not agree when the government comes after ANY person's unalienable Rights. Both the left and the right have attacked me when I didn't see things their way, but in answer to your criticism:

You have a guaranteed Right to keep and bear Arms. Marriage, on the other hand, is a privilege granted by the state. If you disagree with the government on that point, you can have a marriage ceremony and then do a change of name. You won't get the privileges from the government, but you can get married. You should look it up.

In legal parlance, a license is permission from a governmental entity to do that which is otherwise illegal to do. So, if you are claiming a right, why are you asking for permission? I don't and that is why I'm asking 17 - 21 to consider their Rights... though it seems to be pissing a lot of tyrannical despots off.

No one is seeking to ‘dismantle’ the Second Amendment.

All the proposed firearm regulatory measures are perfectly consistent with current Second Amendment jurisprudence, including prohibiting those under 21 from possessing guns.

And marriage is in fact a fundamental right, not a ‘privilege’ ( Zablocki v Redhail (1978)).

Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying were invalidated by the Supreme Court because they violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment.

Should a law be enacted prohibiting those under 21 from possessing a firearm, they are at liberty to file suit in Federal court to seek relief.

Your post is off topic; barely half right and is easily looked up. All anyone has to do is look up the word license and they will see I've almost quoted Black's Law Dictionary verbatim.

This thread was directed to those between the ages of 17 and 21. You, having taken that as an opportunity to troll me, shows your reading skills may be lacking.

Furthermore, going to court costs money. So, I'm telling those between 17 and 21 to avoid joining the military until AFTER they are 21 and then see if the government doesn't start caring about their Rights.

 

[Humorme]

When people find the truth to be so funny, I feel like I missed the boat somewhere.

All the people OVER 21 just had to weigh in. This thread should serve as a wake up call for them. It's sad that so many people calling other's names cannot figure out the differences between Rights and privileges.

Those are the ones telling those under 21 they can't be trusted with their own Liberties. I've made my case. Thank God for the critics.

Given your ignorance as to what constitutes a right or a privilege, you’re in no position to be critical of others.

Seems to me that I'm not the only one recognizing YOUR ignorance between what an unalienable Right and a privilege consists of.