What would happen if we made the age to purchase firearms 25?

[XemaSab]

We already have a drinking age of 21.

So why not 25 for firearms?

There could be stipulations that a younger person could use the firearm when in the presence of the legal owner, so that would allow hunting, target shooting, and other lawful activities.

So tell me DU, why wouldn't this be effective towards preventing a lot of gun violence?

[MineralMan]

1. I'm afraid that would solve nothing.

It is not the age of ownership that has caused the proliferation of arms in our nation. It is the fear in the minds of so many. Fear of all sorts of things, mostly unjustified.

And that fear engenders more fear, creating a mess that will be very, very difficult to clean up.

Increasing the age for owning firearms would do nothing to reduce gun violence. There are simply too many firearms in people's hands. That is the problem. Truly, anyone who wants one can buy, steal, borrow, or otherwise obtain one.

[BlueJazz]

2. Well, the second amendment doesn't talk about the age of gun owners. I'd like to see them sold..

...to 8 year olds and up. (That would some damn control laws written quickly)

[cwydro]

3. The latest shooter was 26.

What difference would it make?

[DavidDvorkin]

4. I favor 105.

[LWolf]

5. I'm not sure about the rest of the population,

but in my area a family has guns that everyone uses. It's a hunting community.

When not hunting, they spend time on target practice, skeet shooting, etc., and the family uses the guns.

While it's not the same thing as assault rifles, plenty of underage people have access whether they are buying them or not. I have 11 and 12 yo students that shoot regularly.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Why is the 2A considered 'absolute' while the rest of the B.o.R. aren't?

We regulate speech, assembly, we have carved out huge exceptions to search and seizure, we have massive tunnels through self incrimination. But regulate fire arms? Oh noes. Not only has this court blocked regulation it has expanded what the 2A applies to, from rifles, which was its historic provenance, to include hand guns, which previously were regulated all over the country.

The people can have a restricted right to bear some arms. Those arms should not include any semi or full auto weapons and the restrictions should include strict control over how weapons are stored and where and how they can be used.

[Nevernose]

8. The same kind of Supreme Court justices

That decided locking up Japanese-Anericans and returning runaway slaves were good ideas.

A few extremists made a poor decision a few years ago, and public opinion will change their minds before long.

[former9thward]

23. It was Roosevelt who thought locking up Japanese-Americans was a good idea.

The SC simply said he had the authority to do so. They did not decide it was a "good idea".

[Nevernose]

27. The point being:

They got it wrong.

[hack89]

34. Stop using the 2A as an excuse for your failure

NY and CT passed strict gun control post Sandy Hook - how was this possible if the Supreme Court is blocking all gun regulation?

Scalia writes in Heller that strict regulation is permitted by the 2A. The only thing Heller says is that you have the right to own a handgun in your home. That is all.

AWBs, registration, UBCs, magazine limits, licensing requirements are all constitutional right now. Stop using the 2A as an excuse - it is not stopping you from passing strict gun control. The real issue is that you don't have the public and political support the laws you want.

[Nevernose]

7. The average age of mass shooters is 35

Or 34, depending upon whose statistics you're looking at.

http://m.mic.com/articles/93824/a-new-report-reveals-a-disturbing-trend-with-mass-shootings-in-america

I think it would be more productive for individual states and locales to ban the sales or importation, including all replacement parts and ammunition, of handguns.

[branford]

16. A ban on parts and ammunition for handguns, no less their sale statewide,

Last edited Sun Oct 4, 2015, 08:34 PM - Edit history (1)

would be an unequivocal violation of Heller and McDonald. That's exactly what DC and Chicago tried to do, and all the resulted were parties at NRA and SAF headquarters and both localities having to cut big checks to SAF, money that has been used to fund other mostly successful gun rights lawsuits.

[Nevernose]

31. Absolutely agree

As I've said elsewhere on this board, though, I think the SCOTUS got the decision wrong big time and that they will eventually reverse that decision.

Look at the people who decided it: Scakia, et al, are hardly indicative of the Titans of legal thought. History will shun their very names.

(I also think state laws holding gun owners criminally responsible for the irresponsible use of their firearms would be upheld even by the loony Scalia court. Your kid shoots another kid on the playground with your shotgun? You go to prison for murder. We do the same thing for deaths occurring during the commission of a felony, e.g. if you and your friend steal a car, he crashes it, and he dies, in most states you're guilty of his murder. We'd see people acting a hell of a lot more responsibly really damn quick if people were regularly held to account for their negligence)

[branford]

32. First, with all due respect, you don't understand the felony murder rule or criminal conspiracy,

nor the concept of proximate cause in civil litigation.

I sadly have neither the time or inclination for yet another long post on the subject this morning, but note that firearm owners who are actually negligent with their guns, using widely applicable and long-standing civil jurisprudence, can indeed face lawsuits for their own negligence. What you appear to want is some ridiculous strict liability for gun ownership (not use), and ironically such advocacy (along with numerous frivolous lawsuits), is the reason for the existence of laws like the PLCAA.

It would also be imprudent to wait for the Supreme Court to overturn Heller and McDonald. Under stare decisis and long-standing Court culture, SCOTUS is normally loathe to overturn precedent, particularly so soon after an original case and when it is otherwise popular (see polls by Gallup, Pew and others). The same jurisprudence and culture that keeps abortion legal with a conservative Court, will keep Heller and McDonald good law for at least generations. The justices know that the political center of the court sometimes shifts, and they have no desire to see their treasured cases decimated because of a change of a justice or two. Think of it as their version of mutually assured destruction. Simply, the Court will not even entertain such a radical shift until public opinion is overwhelmingly in support of eliminating an individual right to keep and bear arms, and the current trajectory shows support is increasing. Heck, the Democratic Platform even expressly acknowledges firearm ownership as an individual right.

Lastly, even if the Second Amendment disappeared or Heller overturned, not much would change. Most current national gun control proposals are constitutional under Heller jurisprudence, yet purportedly popular measures like universal background checks still couldn't pass a Democratically-controlled Senate. I believe a unicorn from the Communist Party has a better chance of being elected president than Congress passing a ban of the sale of handguns and their parts and ammunition.

[Nevernose]

44. I understand the felony murder rule quite well, thank you.

I realize it doesn't apply to gun negligence as it stands. I'm suggesting that it be modified to punish negligent firearm owners in the same way the actual trigger-pullers are. In the case I mentioned, I feel that the person leaving out a loaded shotgun for an eleven year old to murder an eight year should, themselves, be punished.

In retrospect, I think the confusion over felony murder might be jurisdictional: in my state, for instance (and several others), if anyone dies during the commission of a felony for any reason related to that felony, the accomplices can be charged with murder. To be fair, I've seen it initially charged (but never actually carried through; a bargaining chip) in a stolen car with an intoxicated driver and the passenger was charged with murder. Again: DA didn't actually carry it through.

However, I was also personally involved with (although this is the Internet, so I might have personally have been involved with Lincoln's assassination, but let's go with it ) a case in which two men broke into an empty house. The house was not empty; the frightened homeowner shot and killed one of the unarmed intruders, and the other unarmed intruder was wounded. The wounded intruder was charged with murder, and was convicted, and is (probably) still sitting in prison. Because someone died in the commission of a violent felony (in this case, home invasion). It doesn't matter who killed that person exactly.

I'm saying that gun owners who leave weapons laying around for toddlers to shoot each other with should face the same criminal penalties for whatever that toddler did with the gun, even if there needs to be a change in law to provide for that. (Although now that I think about it, technically a caretaker could be charged with whatever crime a young child committed, but that would take some Jack McCoy Law&Order shit to convict on).

Also, I respect your opinion of the sanctity of the judicial system. The concepts of stability and precedence are something our judicial system has been caretaking since the Romans occupied Britain (often with mixed results). Personally, I'm jaded. I think the concept of stare decisis got flushed down the toilet with Bush v. Gore. In fact, it sets the gold standard for why stare decisis is bullshit in the 21st century (I recommend Bugliosi's book on the subject). Scalia recently reversed himself and mocked the Justice who set the precedent. The judicial system in this country is horribly fucked up, and I guess I'm cynical and jaded and other various adjectives towards it these days.

[branford]

45. There's a big distinction is your examples that differ with your proposals.

In each instance of the felony murder, all the criminal parties were intentionally engaged in the criminal enterprise, and such intentional involvement is the primary reason for the sharing of criminal legal responsibility, including the instance where the victim shot one of the perpetrators.

Your proposals would massively extend the doctrine to unintentional, allegedly negligent conduct. Felony murder is quite controversial as it is, but your idea would upend the very nature of criminal responsibility. That's what I was referring to when I suggested you might not understand the felony murder doctrine.

[XemaSab]

30. I'm talking about all gun deaths including street crime and suicide

n/t

[Heeeeers Johnny]

9. The 21 drinking age isn't set by federal law.

It's basically left up to the states to comply or lose federal highway funding.

If it were up to me, I'd use the age that one is eligible for the draft as a yardstick: if one is old enough to serve in the
military, they're old enough to drink, vote, posses firearms and whatever other rights and privileges older adults enjoy.

[laundry_queen]

11. I agree with you.

That's how it is here in my province in Canada (Some have their drinking age as 19 which always struck me as ridiculous. It's 18 here in Alberta). If you can serve and vote, you can drink and gamble and shoot. imo.

[KamaAina]

37. Many U.S. states had 19 before the federal crackdown.

Likely because some high school students are 18.

[laundry_queen]

46. Yeah I know

My parents lived in a town 5 min from the border and speak often of all the Americans that came over the border into Canada to drink, because the age in that province was 18. Even more came to visit on weekends after it went to 21 in the US. Apparently many of the small towns at the time owed their economy to visiting Americans, lol.

I still think 18 is fine. If you can sign up to die or possibly be maimed for the rest of your life, you can drink a beer. High school is as good a time as any to learn to drink. No worse than college, really. It's all the same to me. I was 12 when I started drinking on the weekends (dysfunctional family, alcoholic father) and I never had problems getting alcohol at 12. And my sources were NOT 18 year olds. And when I turned 18 I never bought for anyone, ever (and no I am not an alcoholic, despite my early start, no time to drink now as a single mom of 4. I have a beer and I promptly fall asleep, lolol. It's a waste.). Not saying it never happens. I do think it would be interesting to know if there is more illegal drug use in areas where the drinking age is 21 vs 18 among underage teens. I heard in places where the drinking age is 21, teens find it easier to score drugs than to acquire alcohol. I think it would be interesting to know for sure.

[treestar]

15. The answer to that is raise the military age too

People ought to get 25 years of life before risking it in the military.

[oneshooter]

22. 25 is considered to be the

oldest that could pass basic training. By the time you are trained in your MOS you would be a relatively old man of 27.

[stevenleser]

39. In the USMC I believe it. There are folks in their late 30's who have gone through USAF BMTS

Much different basic than yours though.

[oneshooter]

41. Yea, well the Chair Force tends to sit down to work. n/t

[stevenleser]

42. Doesn't make too much sense to stand up in the cockpit... LOL! nt

[oneshooter]

43. thats right.

[Snobblevitch]

12. I hunted waterfowl by myself at the age of 14.

I got off the schoolbus, ran inside, got my hunting gear, and rode my bike with the cased shotgun strapped to the handlebars. The hunting slough was about a mile from my house. My dad knew exactly where the duck blind was (we built it together) and told my mom I was perfectly safe. I had to choose my shots carefully so the ducks would drop in the field behind me.

[Jim Beard]

17. I did the same. Born in the 1940's many things were much different

I keep thinking about how me and my friends had gun racks in the back of our trucks, (Farming community) but I don't think that lasted too long. But almost all the shotguns, rifles and pistols were limited in clip size. Shot guns have always been a single to three shell capacity although some have removed the plug that will allow it to hold 5 shells.

The rifles were small clips with most holding 5 shells and one chambered.

The pistols were largely revolvers with the standard 6 shots. Police departments used the snub nosed 38 but were were forced to change when the criminals were able to buy higher clip numbers and killer bullets. They had to and sad to say that because of the sale of the more powerful weapons, our police departments have to be organized like the military.

Its all very sad. Most of our advances I endorse even though at my age there is no joy in buying a news phone and learning how to make a telephone call.

The sheriffs reaction to this has really disturbed me, and here is a side not to the reporting of not saying the shooters name.......

From the Arizona State University News' something omitted by that same study....

[link:https://asunews.asu.edu/20150702-shooting-contagion|The resulting paper, “Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings,” appears in the July 2 edition of PLoS ONE.

On average, mass killings involving firearms occur approximately every two weeks in the U.S., and school shootings occur on average monthly. The team found that the incidence of these tragedies is significantly higher in states with a high prevalence of firearm ownership.]

https://asunews.asu.edu/20150702-shooting-contagion

[Snobblevitch]

20. My solo youth hunting occurred much later than yours.

It is still legal for 14 year olds to hunt solo in Minnesota.

I remember when police departments phased out .38 cal revolvers to .357. Then they went to semi-auto 9mm. Now, many use .45ACP or .40SW.

I do not believe restricting the age to posses a gun to age 25 would do much to reduce gun crime. In fact, it would actually increase gun crime.

[Jim Beard]

21. I don't know which age limit is best

I still have my farm and try to keep the jackrabbit population down. I don't shoot the passive cotton tails even though they are better eating. I have no use for Jackrabbits. I have shot several this summer and missed some too. The last one I shot, I only injured him. He was trying to escape but couldn't get very far.

I have to tell you for the first time in my life, It really bothered me to kill the animal that was suffering. When I was young it was sort of like closing the act with more acceptance. Not anymore, I do not like to see the suffering of a wounded animal, even a Jackrabbit.

By me, age is a proof of a natural slowing amount of violence tolerated. I have no desire to teach my grandsons how to hunt and kill.

They can instead learn martial arts.

[Snobblevitch]

25. I don't have grandchilren,

but when I do, I hope to take into the woods and fields (we have a couple hundred acres) and teach them about wildlife, and yes, teach them to hunt. We hunt mostly grouse and deer. It is important to make a clean shot so there is minimal suffering. People who don't understand hunting believe there is a 'thrill in the kill'. That's not it. We have around 11 or 12 who gather at our deer camp. My 80+ year old father, his sons, and grandsons. A couple friends usually join us as well. We look forward to the hunt all year. If we actually get a few deer, that's a bonus. My older brother and I are the camp cooks. He does breakfast and I do supper. Many times I skip hunting in the afternoon to be the cook.

[NobodyHere]

13. More young people in jail

Same amount of violence.

[treestar]

14. Does sound like a good idea

sometimes I think it would be best for society if males 15-25 were locked up somewhere. It's a joke, but you have to think - fewer drunk driving accidents, fewer accidents, and so on.

[Jim Beard]

29. The wimmen folk would raise hell for

taking away their "bad Boys".

[snooper2]

33. A better idea would be if people over 55 couldn't serve elected office

too out of touch and "grand-mothered in" office to get anything done

[bettyellen]

35. LOL, of force young people to vote maybe? I wish they would, but.....

[goldent]

18. I wonder how many people under 25 who have guns actually bought them

I'm thinking more about "everyday" gun homicides, which I imagine are much more numerous than mass shootings, although the question applies to both cases.

[rug]

19. The death rate of 25 year olds would spike.

[Rex]

24. Because we have 300 million individual problems already.

We could try it, but wrap your head around the number 300 million.

[Evergreen Emerald]

26. Don't insurance companies raise rates of teenagers until a certain age?

I think it is worth consideration. The mass killings have recently been perpetrated by people of similar age.

[TipTok]

28. Drinking and guns need to go to 18...

If you can join the Army, you deserve every possible right.

[Lee-Lee]

36. You answered your own question by pointing out the drinking age is 21

Visit any college campus and see how well that keeps 18-20 year olds sober...

[stevenleser]

38. It would be a step in the right direction. Add 80 years to that and you've got me.

[bunnies]

40. If one is old enough to be sent to die in a foreign land by our government...

one is old enough to own a gun.