Raise the Age of a Long Gun Purchase to 21? Question of the Day

Team5 Black Rain AR15

According to President Trump’s most recent Tweetstorm, the CIC is more-than-a-little willing to support a federal law raising the minimum age for a legal long gun purchase to qualified buyers over the age of 18. Because, and this is just a wild guess . . .

the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School spree killer was under 21.

What sense does that make?

Would Nikolas Cruz have abandoned his plan to attack his former school and slaughter innocent students if he’d been unable to legally purchase an AR15 from a federal firearms licensee? That seems dangerously naive.

Speaking of naive . . .

I’ve heard gun control advocates argue that potential long gun buyers younger than 21 aren’t mature enough to purchase a long gun. Their brains aren’t fully formed. They’re naive. Lack impulse control. Etc.

Are you picking up what they’re putting down? Or is this just another attempt to nibble away at Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms that will no effect on criminal firearms use?


  1. avatar RonO says:

    This country’s messed up idea of adulthood makes me crazy.
    16 to drive (varies)
    18 to be an “adult” sign contracts, join the military
    21 to drink….

    Its just crazy. Pick an age as “adult” and stop.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      To be fair, driving is a bit of a different discussion. But I can largely agree on that. I would say that the age should be 25 with specific exceptions for demonstrable maturity. If you want evidence, take a look at the infantile brats the current crop of BS field college professors are turning lose on society. A large majority of these brats have never heard the word “no” and are utterly incapable of functioning as independent adults.

      1. avatar Hank says:

        That’s not just an anecdotal issue, either. The American problem of “delayed adolescence” has been neurologically observed. An 18 year old in 1980 was neurologically more adult than one in 2016 (by measures of independence, taking responsibility, understanding cause, effect, and consequences).

        When you couple the problems of delayed adolescence, the increasing lack of religious, moral, and ethical foundations, and a cultural paranoia (the fear that “they are out to get us” constantly reinforced through identity politics on the far left and and alt-right, SJWs, opportunistic politicians, etc.) you get a pretty hot mess. And we’re there.

      2. avatar SpeleoFool says:

        What you’re suggesting here was my pet peeve–at least until I finally completed enough laps around the sun to graduate from institutionalized age discrimination.

        So self-motivated, responsible youths should be held back by the lowest common denominator? Shouldn’t we try to incentivize working hard, learning, and demonstrating responsibility instead of just lumping everyone into one category based on a single (questionable) criterion?

        I spent my youth focused on academics. I skipped a grade and graduated high school with over a year’s worth of college credits. For my efforts I was rewarded with ineligibility to get a job, drive and even see certain movies with my friends and peers, all thanks to misguided age-based policies. The ultimate insult was being denied the opportunity to rent a damn bicycle on Catalina Island because I wasn’t yet 25 years old; by that time I already owned a home (ok, a mortgage, lol), and had a full-time job as an engineer.

        Oh, also, I got to fire an M16 (yes, it was select-fire, but I only shot semi-auto) during a JROTC field trip and I would have been ~14 or 15 at the time. So middle fingers to the idea of needing to be 21 to operate a rifle, too.

        1. avatar AFGus says:

          Agree with your comments 1000%!

      3. avatar William B says:

        Pwrserge, you may have stumbled onto a major solution to many problems–a solution the Democrats should jump on. Minimum age to drive 25. Minimum age to vote 25. Minimum age to buy alcohol (and whatever else the politicians make legal in order to tax) 25. Minimum age to buy a firearm 25.

        The carbon footprint boys should really like the 25 driving age. Just think how many people will forced to use public transportation, taking hundreds of thousands of cars off the road (oops a problem for GM, aka Obama Motors.) Working for a few years should make 25 the age where they realize that voting more government spending means voting less of their paycheck they get to keep. Drinking age 25 may put a dent into Adolf Coors EPS, but it might stop frat boys from making some poor sucker drink himself to death. And firearms, 25 probably is a good minimum age. By then, the modern participation trophy generation should be off Ritalin, Zoloft, etc., so their thinking should be a little clearer.

        Well done, Pwrserge. Our problems are solved. Now if we could just get 25 as minimum age to get pregnant, we solve the larger problem: overpopulation.

        1. avatar Krub Allmen says:

          Can’t say agree more. Big pile of bread crumbs for you.

      4. avatar Retrocon says:

        You are correct, driving is different… more teens kill or are killed in cars, if I am not mistaken, than with firearms.

    2. avatar TruthTellers says:

      26 to be removed from parent’s family healthcare plans…

      The reason 16 is the age for driving is because 16 is the age for minimum wage labor at coffee shops, fast food resturants, etc. They want those kids out their doing work, but I don’t like the idea of 16 year olds driving myself, I’d raise that to 18.

      18 for most everything.

      21 for alcohol.

      Where do guns fit in? IDK, but we already have 21 for handguns and that doesn’t seem to be opposed, though it should because 18-20 year old women are most likely to be sexually assaulted. I would say 21 for semi automatic weapons. 18-20 year olds can still defend themselves and hunt with pump shotguns and lever/bolt action rifles.

      I don’t think all rifles and guns should be restricted until 21. That’s doesn’t make sense.

      1. avatar John - the rea says:

        And this is the reason they will eventually end up with all the guns….so very few are willing to draw a line.

        1. avatar AFGus says:

          Exactly right!

      2. avatar Big Bill says:

        “18-20 year olds can still defend themselves and hunt with pump shotguns and lever/bolt action rifles.”

        Such guns are unwieldy to carry. Not all assaults on women happen in a home.
        A 9mm is far more likely to be at hand in case of an assault. (Any handgun could be used in place of the 9mm)

      3. avatar Joe R. says:


        If your government says that it can’t do “X”, unless and until you do “Y”, then only the first part of their sentence IS TRUE.


        F em ALL.

    3. avatar Nativeson says:

      If a person is too immature and irresponsible to own a rifle at 18, we need to raise the enlistment age to 21 also, along with the voting age. The stampede to gun control is dangerous. The mob mentality must be replaced with real thought and solutions that don’t include the destruction of civil liberties.

      1. avatar tiger says:

        First off the voting age is covered by Amendment 26. As for the Military, that is less than 1% of the population.

        1. avatar Marty says:

          And what percent of the population commits these horrible crimes?

        2. avatar Big Bill says:

          And the right to keep and bear arms, with the addendum “shall not be infringed” is in the second amendment.
          And yet…

      2. avatar TheUnspoken says:

        No reactionary changes is the right answer! I don’t agree with splitting “assault weapons” or “semi auto” into a separate group, or we are saying that some guns are intrinsically more dangerous and need special regulation. Makes it easier once the old person or next Vegas shooter that is over 21 comes along, then we already have a set of scary guns and precedent to further restrict.

        Making it illegal for under 21 year olds to murder, and provide sufficient incentive not to do so and punishment to match. Also since kids aren’t getting the memo, someone needs to educate them on why they aren’t the center of the universe, and that murder is morally and ethically wrong. That would require crazy notions like absolute truth and morals, good, evil, not just feelz.

        1. avatar AFGus says:

          Here here! 👍

        2. avatar Wzrd says:

          No reactionary changes. Exactly. Like a 21 year age requirement would’ve prevented Cruz from doing it. It might’ve prevented him from buying a rifle legally when he did. What about if he acquired it illegally? What if he waited & committed the crime when he was 21 (less than two years from now)? What if he used some other means to kill?
          How many bumpstocks are in the wild? Tens of thousands? Maybe more? ONE guy uses one to kill people & now “they must be banned”! Making laws based on the unique circumstances of individual crimes is completely idiotic.

      3. avatar helenae sabin says:

        Mob mentality toward what?

    4. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Even in Australia you are full adult at 18. You can vote, enter into contracts in your own name, purchase and consume alcohol, and purchase tobacco products. Driving on Learners permit can start at 16 years and you can then get a provisional restricted driver’s license at 17 (which lasts for two years before you get a full unrestricted license). And at 18 you can obtain a firearm’s license and purchase anything covered by your license.

      I bought my first firearm at the age of 19.

    5. avatar Hank says:

      I like how all of the sudden people here seem to think that if we ban the sales of guns to people under 21 somehow they won’t get them. Like they’ll just magically be like “oh well guess I can never murder anyone now.” Oh what’s that? We got to DO something?

    6. avatar helenae sabin says:

      GUNS: To BUY a gun, you should be 21 years of age whether a handgun or rifle but you should have to go through background checks including school discpline records. IF a school has had trouble with you or you are kicked out, you wait until you are 25. Gun safety should be taught in schools and a mandatory class on that subject should be required. We teach too much about “sensitivity” when we should be teaching kids skills, vocational education, reading ,history, math and science – not the crap they learn today from liberal teachers and the common core education that passes for education. IF we did like they used to do in Germany, at 8th grade kids take a test and if they pass they go on to higher education. If not, they get vocational education so they have skills to survive with.

      MILITARY: I think for the military we should make military training mandatory from ages 18-21. Many children today need discipline instilled in them at that time so they learn the consequences of their actions. Many children today are idiots and over indulged. Look at those who eat laundry soap and teaspoons of cinnamon. Many of today’s liberal parents do NOT teach discipline or responsibility and their kids today show that.

      DRUGS/ALCOHOL: Marijuana or cigarettes or alcohol: age 21.

      VOTING: 21

    7. avatar Arc says:

      Can’t really compare Afghanistan to the USA but I’ve seen a few 15-17 year olds carrying guns, married, and expected to provide. That said, the majority of the world holds 18 to be the age of adulthood. Japan being an exception at 20, though youths are expected to be matured before then.

      18 across the board, and yes, driving too.

    8. avatar American Patriot says:

      You’re either an adult at 18 or you’re not. If they want to change it to 21 fine but make all rights at 21 I.E. Voting, joining the military, drinking & gambling. If you’re not responsible enough to handle a weapon at 18 then you’re not responsible enough to vote at 18 and we all know (at least some of us) when you join the military within 2 wks your shooting a select fire automatic weapon. The liberals should not get to choose what things you can do when your considered an adult….All or nothing 18 or 21.

    9. avatar James Palminteri says:

      It seems they tried the same arguments to try to prevent African-Americans from flying airplanes in WWII. Same old prejudice never fully goes away.

  2. avatar jwtaylor says:

    Sure, if you also ban them from entering the military, registering for selective service, marrying, serving on a jury, driving a car, signing a contract, entering public office, or voting until then as well.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      I would agree on everything except entering military service. The way I see it, military service would serve to correct the problem we are trying to address. In fact, I would wave the age of majority requirements for any current or former military.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        I think they should have every male and female do 1 year of military service once they reach 17 years old. It should be part of the school curriculum. They wouldn’t actually serve overseas/combat. Instead it would be training for a physical standard, weapons proficiency, military discipline, martial arts, natural disaster response, medical training, etc. Basically, basic training and possible natural disaster aid.

        Korea requires 2 years military service; they even force celebrities to serve. Only doing 1 year during high school shouldn’t an issue. Kids will get into shape and find out who they are before they go to college.

        1. avatar Publius says:

          So you’re advocating slavery? I seem to remember something about a war and an amendment to the Constitution over that issue…

        2. avatar Jeff Davis says:

          Maybe a return to organized slavery would be a good idea. If we’re going to say Fuck it to gun rights we might as well say Fuck it too all of them. There’s still currently slavery in every country, it’s just not legal. Legalizing slavery would bring it out in the open and regulate it. Instead of all the sexual deviants and terrorists hoging up the slaves, the government and private corporations could use those slaves and provide them with proper room and board. A slave is an investment and will be treated fairly, because a healthy slave works harder. Think of all the good this could do. All the homeless and felons could be enslaved. All the welfare recipients could be enslaved. Prisoners of war could be enslaved. Just think, we could re-invigorate our dead cotton industry. We could then invade and conquer many parts of Latin America and have a thriving industry of sugar plantations. We could also breed th strongest slaves to produce a more productive race of slaves.

          *NOTICE* This post was one big joke to both enrage and tickle you.

        3. avatar tiger says:

          Social engineering by the DOD is bad idea, waste of time, manpower & screws up the private sector economy. We are not South or North Korea. The services want quality, not 500,000 Gomer Pyles.

      2. avatar jwtaylor says:

        Pwrserge, sadly, the military is caving into the weakness of this generation, not strengthening it. The Army is now removing land nav and grenade throwing from basic training. Why? Because so many kids can’t throw, throw anything at all, that they are having to teach kids to throw before they can hand them a grenade. Why no land nav? Because kids don’t even know the basic cardinal directions and don’t know what the North Star is or where the sun comes up and sets. It’s taking too long to train them. That’s how phenomenally stupid and worthless this generation is.
        Instead of making kids stronger, they are just making the military weaker.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          You’re not wrong. But that hardly addresses the issue that an 18yo in 1920 is not anywhere near the same level of maturity as an 18yo today.

        2. avatar rocketscientist says:

          yep saw this at jump school in 1994. pull up bars hung outside the entrance to the mess halls…theory being, if you can’t do 10 pull ups you don’t eat. that quickly turned into “well, give it a shot, and do pushups if you can’t get 10”. sigh. then it was “fall out of a run and you wash out of airborne school”. now, and I hate to say it was related to females in the class-but lets be honest it was because of females in the class, falling out of an airborne run (which is a friggin 10min mile run btw) didn’t wash you out either. then came the stress cards which thankfully I never saw in my time. brutal, just brutal this slide we are on.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          10 minute mile? Wow… airborne training is nowhere near as though as I thought it was. Even my dwarven ass could run a 30 minute 3-mile. Mind you, if I couldn’t do 20 pull-ups on an average day, there was something seriously wrong with me.

        4. avatar ironicatbest says:

          No shit, they don’t teach land navigation or grenades, I didn’t know that. We’re fucked. What kind of military do we got? I suppose the new soldier is supposed to Facebook the enemy, say something derogatory, and hope the enemy offs themselves. LBFNC chao ,co

    2. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

      Okay, I’ve seen this a few times today. We need to realize that threatening snowflakes with not being able to join the military is seriously out of touch. They don’t want to join. They want to get high in a gun free country, preferably in a one-nation world. It’s like threatening a Jihadist with not being able to watch Christian sermons.

      I agree with the other things on the list, and military service makes logical sense to go with it (in a way), but it’s still kinda silly IMHO.

      On a side note, I read today that the Pentagon said that 24 out of 34 million (or 71% of) Americans ages 17-24 aren’t fit for service because of health issues, education, or criminal record.

      1. avatar onezero says:

        It’s not about threatening 18 year olds with not being able to join military, it’s letting the government know they wouldn’t have a military without 18 year olds. Not letting them vote at 18 would take away a lot of the Left’s brain washed voting block

        1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          That makes sense, but it only delays the inevitable. The fact remains that this is a very leftist generation, and the next one will be worse, and the one after that etc.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          If you think this is a very leftist generation, you really should look at comparative studies. Nothing makes a conservative like having to go out into the world and work for a living.

      2. avatar Brian says:

        Tell the snowflakes they can go serve in a different country than the US- a gun free country with plenty of safe space for them and their friends. Then, when they pass boot camp(call it something like funtime rainbow training), we send them to Venezuela or Brazil and leave them there and mark them as having renounced their US citizenship.

      3. avatar DAVE F says:

        SARCASUM: Except for age, are you sure the Pentagon wasn’t talking about our politicians?

    3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      While we’re at it, ban teenage pregnancy. Why would we want to disarm a 19 year old single mother who lives in a bad neighborhood. And it would significantly lower the juvenile delinquency rate.

    4. avatar Cruzo1981 says:


    5. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Guess we’ll also have to raise the age to get a hunting license, since 18-20 year olds won’t be able to possess a firearm to hunt with.

  3. avatar pwrserge says:

    That’s an interesting question. Right now, I would argue that the average 18yo is far too infantilized to be given any serious responsibility without significant re-training. I can see restricting the legal age of majority to 21 or even 25 with an exception being made for completed or ongoing military service.

    1. avatar David Hastings says:

      I see a common theme to your posts. You seem to think yourself superior and don’t mind taking away the rights of others as long as yours are preserved.

      What about the people under 21 (or 25 in your case) that are intelligent and mentally sound but can fulfill a military enlistment for physical reasons?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Then wait a few years. Nobody is saying that person X can’t own guns / vote / whatever ever. What we’re saying is that we, as a society decided that the arbitrary age set back when we were and agrarian society which forced children to grow up quickly by modern standards doesn’t make sense any more. An infantile 20yo in 1920 was an exception. Today, it’s more likely to be the rule.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        If the age for everything was raised to 21 or 25, kids would get pissed about not being trusted with responsibility. They will riot over not being able to smoke or drink for years after high school. They will get tired of taking horrible public transportation. Then they will want to prove how responsible they can be at a younger age so the legal limit will be lowered.

        Right now kids do not want to take responsibility and their parents are doing the same. Why should society allow such power in the hands of a group who say they can’t handle it? Car accidents will go down, anti human rights laws will have a much harder time getting passed, drug issues will lessen and (according to kids) there will be less mass shootings.

        1. avatar Rick says:

          I was a kid of the 80s when they raised the drinking age from 19 to 21, and there wasn’t rioting in the street, I was grandfathered in, but if you were a week older you weren’t, and I think that is a bit more important for your average 19 year old than buying a long gun.

    2. avatar S.Crock says:

      You are literally using the classic anti gun argument. Because some people are bad or irresponsible, it’s fine to strip millions of other people of their Constitutional right. So the person who moves out of their house at 18 better just hold their pepper spray and rape whistle close for the next few years because they aren’t responsible enough to protect themselves with a shotgun or rifle?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Not really. I’m just acknowledging the reality that most 18yo people today are children. We can institute a court test to advance someone to legal majority, but granting it automatically at 18 no longer makes sense.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        If the adult age was raised to 21 or 25, it would be like it is now just later in life. You can’t buy a pistol at 14. You can’t do drugs at 16. You can’t consent to sex at 17. The new age limit would make legal adulthood be your early twenties.

        Personally, I think the age should vary for everything. It should be logic based. A kid can get a job, a car and consent to sex before 18. However, an 18 year old shouldn’t be doing drugs, partying or gambling. At 18 you should be able to own and carry arms. I don’t think you should be allowed to enter military combat or vote before 22.

    3. avatar Hank says:

      The problem is the ever increasing age of adulthood. Before you know it you’ll have to be 45 to do anything. And what then? Couldn’t this ever increasing age restriction of adulthood be an end-around to destroy our rights and enslave us? Isn’t it true that the democrats want everyone to be treated as a child as it is? I don’t like it.

    4. avatar KenW says:

      couple thousand years ago….
      “The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.”

      40 years from now I expect these kids will be complaining about the waste of youth that they see around them.

  4. avatar Nick says:

    But those 18, 19, and 20 year olds will still be able to vote? Figured as much.

    So, it’s ok to strip that age group of one constitutional right, but not another?

  5. avatar Del says:

    Sure…along with voting rights. Immaturity is immaturity.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      We can barely get 50% of registered voters to show up, age isn’t really an issue with voting.

  6. avatar Mas Cool Arrow says:

    If the brain is not developed enough to handle fire arms, then the brain is not developed enough to drive, vote, enlist in the military, enter into contracts, get married, etc.

  7. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    Nope. Non. Nein. Da. Nyet. No way, Jose.

    My response to almost any emotional “response” to a single incident would be no.

    An exception might be: we’ve lost another engine and you must put on a parachute right now. Alright, I’ll think about it. 8>)

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      I think the lack of emotional and intellectual development in our current society has been demonstrated long before this incident. Just take a look at the soy-boy weaklings that like to cos-play as revolutionaries. The way I see it,

  8. avatar Smitty says:

    On my 21st birthday I bought a NIB Browning HiPower MKlll.

  9. avatar NukemJim says:

    The people who say that brains at age 18 are not mature are correct they are not mature until the ages of 23 to 25.. I realize the amount of heat I will take for this statement but I have no problems with making the age to purchase a firearm 21 except for those who are serving or have served in the military. I am also for raising the age of everything else to 21. The only reason the age of majority was lowered to 18 was for the Vietnam War the argument was they can be sent out to kill and be killed but they cannot buy a beer. The people who came up with that statement expected the government not to let 18 year olds go to war instead the government chose to send 18 year olds to war and let them buy beer.

  10. avatar Sumyungguy says:

    So many of you are giving me the lulz. Age is a number, and to present your argument that older age=greater maturity…shows how ignorant you are.

    1. avatar DangerDave says:

      Exactly. It’s hika to hear some of these guys.

    2. avatar pwrserge says:

      Please show me the mobs of middle aged men running around cosplaying as revolutionaries.

      1. avatar trollolol says:

        It was middle age men and women who taught these revolutionaries at colleges.

        Or I could just point to the fat guys in ‘militias’ and the 3%ers who need to lose 30% body fat

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          You mean the ones standing around like responsible adults and not attacking people and throwing acid in their faces?

          I hate to break this to you, but you don’t heed to be in great shape to fight from a fixed position.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Funny, but you know what I meant.

        2. avatar Rick says:

          No, he knew what you said, so he showed you what you asked for. Look at any college football game, thousands of middle age dudes acting like 17year olds. Heck, I’m one of them sometimes and I’m 50.

  11. avatar NYC2AZ says:

    So, according to the left, kids as young as 6 can decide to start gender transition surgery because “they know who they are” but are too immature to own a rifle on the same day they can join the military? What a time to be alive.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Don’t look to the left for logic.

  12. avatar C.S. says:

    Either you’re _treated_ as an adult or not… same age as voting.

  13. avatar Anonymous says:

    Either you are an adult with full Constitutional rights or you are not. There is no in-between. An in-between establishes a second class of citizens.

  14. avatar Dave says:

    And how will that prevent a mass shooting?

    Right, it won’t. The assailant was 19, if I remember correctly.

    Trump needs to stop his mindless twittering, but sadly his babysitter’s nowhere to be seen.

  15. avatar Gman says:

    Clearly we know that our federal government has already determined that the minimum age to handle fully automatic weapons is 17. What’s the problem?

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Simple, those 17yo men are the exception rather than the rule. Sure, strict training corrects the problem, but unless you want to make federal service mandatory, it’s a non-argument.

  16. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    ‘I’ve heard g un control advocates argue that potential long g un buyers younger than 21 aren’t mature enough to purchase a long g un. Their brains aren’t fully formed. They’re naive. Lack impulse control. Etc.’

    Sounds like you’ve been listening to O’Reilly.

  17. avatar B says:

    I have no problem raising the age to purchase a rifle to 21, with the exception for military personnel, but there needs to be compromise so the voting age should be raised to 21 as well.

  18. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Perhaps if parents and teachers stopped infantilizing our kids they’d grow up. A hundred years ago most 21 year old men had a wife, 3 kids and a career. Were they genetically superior to us?

    1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

      Good point.

      But let’s also keep in mind that they were on a compressed schedule. They died two or three decades sooner and death from any number of diseases or accidents was far more likely.*

      *Disclaimer: Rough estimates not based on any knowledge, except for common sense.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Actually, that’s not entirely true. Most of the change in average lifespan can be attributed to grossly decreased infant mortality.

    2. avatar pwrserge says:

      Given how natural selection works, probably. Darwin wasn’t had a lot to work with in an age when we do our best to make sure that stupid people live long enough to reproduce.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        The white population in this country and in Europe has a birth rate too low to sustain it’s population while minority populations have been exploding. This is largely because we wait until we’re in our 30s to get married and start a family anymore and women tend to start having fertility issues by the time they’re 35 years old.

  19. avatar G says:

    Society needs “rules” & the simpler the better. Like it or not kids mature (leave the nest, marry, have kids) much later now (do the research and be informed).

    At the same time the USA is broken/dilapidated in terms of mental health (see 20+ us veteran suicides daily totally unreported of course).

    This is a minefield working against gun rights.

    As a safe gun enthusiast & member of private range …. yes 21-makes full sense for auto-weapons in today’s society. Fact is “kids” today are babied & irresponsible & “guided” by lawnmower parents/teachers. What i did age 10 is far different from what SOCIETY (jury of peers) allows you to do with your 10 year old. Fact.

    As much as the Dums/LIBS/etc. are in their echo chamber so are some gun dreamers on the internet. We’re on the wrong side of this and without Obama/HRC the glory days of firearm ownership in the USA is over. Trump/GOV has a bullseye on their back (and bots to help aim & stir media chaos).

    2A doesn’t guarantee a right to own semi-auto or auto weapons or mags with capacity of 2 rounds either. So lets please be careful about painting ourselves into a corner with irrational, emotional ideas (like your opponents) which ultimately will just cause more firearm ownership deterioration (lower capacity mags, more semi-auto restrictions, higher fees, permits, etc.). Probably sooner than later. Smarten up firearm enthusiast. Please.

    1. avatar Harley says:

      I would love to know where exactly in the 2A says that which you claim. The 2A says ARMS not firearms. Anything that can be used as an armament is protected and cannot be infringed upon. This would include firearms of all types, mags and amunitions. Swords, knives, clubs, hell even rocks if need be. That’s what well regulated means, not regulations.

  20. avatar strych9 says:

    While it’s true that for a lot of people the brain isn’t done developing until the early to mid 20’s and this does affect impulse control, I’ve never heard it suggested by anyone serious that it has anything to do with mass shootings. We’re talking “heat of the moment” control not “spend time planning mass murder”.

    Personally I doubt raising the age to buy a rifle would change anything. People crazy enough to shoot up a school won’t change and can always turn to the black market or a straw purchaser the way the kids at Columbine did.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Mass shootings won’t change by raising the age a few years. What it would reduce is a lot of stupid stuff kids do with cars, drugs and voting.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      strych9 stated the key factor: deficits in judgement and impulse control are NOT the causative factor in “young” spree killers. Therefore, increasing the age to purchase or even possess any firearm will not reduce the number of spree killers nor their casualty count.

      For reference the causative factor in “young” spree killers is abject evil.

  21. avatar Shire-man says:

    So stupid. All of this.

    1. avatar miforest says:

      60,000 in the us die of drug overdose annually , that’s 164 EVERY DAY. almost all from fentanyl from Mexico.
      not a peep from the politicians , press, or citizens. but tell sob stories about 17 kids in a perfectly preventable tragedy and we all become weeping children. Even GOP politicians, conservative media people and regular people who should know better.
      The left clearly had the plan and busses ready and waiting for something like this to happen .
      what a sad pathetic bunch of infantile fools, letting themselves be played like this.

      1. avatar Rick says:

        Just an FYI, nearly all fentanyl is imported from China via standard shipping. Heroin is mostly via Mexican tunnels, but it gets mixed closer to the consumer sale.

  22. avatar miforest says:

    No, not unless they are going to change the voting age too.

  23. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Even so, this would only apply to purchases through federal firearms licensees. States with a minimum age of 18 would continue with that. So those under-21 could still buy rifles within their states.

    So all this does is inconvenience some people, while not prohibiting other people? Strong countermeasure. Thanks for stopping by.

  24. avatar C.S. says:

    BTW, I can’t believe the number of people that automatically assume that this POS shooter is “right wing” and therefore we have to give up our rights as an apology. I’d like to remind people that the Jew hating National Socialists (Nazis) were always left wing to begin with and as well as all the white supremicists racists in the U.S. It’s the left that is creating class warfare. In fact, the intellectual assault of Communism by the left screams class and racial warfare.

  25. avatar DoomGuy says:

    No. Not only no but hell no.

    And it’s sad to see so many people support this here in the comments.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      That’s not entirely accurate. What people support is redefining the legal age of majority, which, given present evidence, seems like a grand idea. I don’t want a bunch of 20yo SJW twats that have never worked a day in their lives voting either.

      1. avatar DoomGuy says:

        Voting is not a right. The legal voting age should be at least 25, and you should be gainfully employed among other things.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          I don’t see where we disagree…

        2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          Then that whole “Voting Rights Act” thing is seriously misnamed, huh? Good grief.

          Or do you believe in government without the consent, aka, voting, of the governed?

        3. avatar tiger says:

          Wrong, And the 26th Amendment backs that.

        4. avatar DoomGuy says:


          Show me where in the bill of rights it says the “right to vote”. The left uses the “voting rights act” to flood the polls with leftist tools and dupes to vote for their communist agenda and call it “democracy.

          Government at the consent of the governed goes to the basic ideas of people not bowing down to tyranny and an overreaching government. Not voting and accepting tyranny because he left can force a majority. The constitution protects the rights of the minority against the majority.

          Stop believing the white picket fence, barbecues, little league, church on sunday and doing your “civic duty” of voting on Election Day vision of America. Because that’s not what America is about.

      2. avatar DoomGuy says:

        We seem to disagree on the thought that at 18 you’re too young to own an AR15 (with which I disagree). Then why are young men and women allowed to join the military at 17 & 18? Why can you drive at 16? Why are you automatically charged as an adult and locked up in an adult prison at 17 (in the state of Texas)?

        If 18 year olds (who are considered grown ass men) are too immature to make any sort of decisions on their own (which many people here have suggested) then why not raise the age of “adulthood” to 21?

        But then you wouldn’t be able to have overzealous DA’s ruin young people’s lives to get reelected because they’re “tough on crime” (even though they let older criminals off or cop plea deals), globalists like john McCain and Lindsey Graham wouldn’t be able to get off on their fetish of sending Americans off to fight and die in foreign lands, and the establishment wouldnt be able to get elected on their communist platform.

        I just wish people would stop ceding our rights and calling it “compromise”. It’s disgusting.

  26. avatar Evey259 says:

    Nope. If so, raise the voting age to 21, along with the enlistment age to 21. It’s idiotic. I bought a rifle when I turned 18 and had my own place by 19. In the interim between 18 and 21, I was not a second class citizen and refuse to let the generation after me be treated as one either.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      How many decades ago was that? Have you seen the snowflakes coming out of high school these days?

      1. avatar Evey259 says:

        This decade.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Congratulations sir, you’re in the 3rd standard deviation. Anecdotal evidence is still not an argument.

      2. avatar Evey259 says:

        You know, for someone who escaped the communist, you sure seem hellbent on creating different classes of citizens, comrade.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yeah… If only one could go from one class to the other just by waiting a few years… Gee… That would almost make them NOT CLASSES.

    2. avatar tiger says:

      The voting age is not changing. Few Under 30 vote anyway. Joining the military is your choice & fewer than 1% of the nation does.

      Really, guys wake up call time. Bend on this or the AWB will come back in force.

  27. avatar Ralph says:

    Well, if teenagers buy guns, they might unintentionally hurt some people. But if they vote, they might intentionally fvck up the whole damn country. Again.

    Teens in military service (who might be required to go into harm’s way for their country) should be able to vote. The others should be told to STFU until they grow up.

  28. avatar Texican says:

    Maturity is the key. Age is just a number. There are many people who are more mature at age 10 than some adults ever achieve. When I taght my 6 yr old daughter how to shoot I would have trusted her with a gun more than many adults because she took it seriously. Many parents don’t raise their children to be mature because they aren’t either. The object of parenting is to produce mature adults who are self-sufficient. How many of us know people who are adult in age but are incapable of taking care of their own affairs? The only reason we set arbitrary age limits is to hope people are mature by that age. I believe once someone has demonstrated maturity in an activity or skill then they are good to go. I don’t believe in govt. mandated testing. Our culture needs to change in the direction of teaching maturity at the earliest age possible. The schooling and mentorship given to many of the Founding Father’s as well as the culture produced men of great stature. Are we less capable than them?

  29. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

    This comment thread is one big echo chamber of old, out of touch, rose glassed people that believe they were more mature at 18 than kids these days. College kids of every generation were the “libtards” of their day.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Yeah… because college students in the early 2000s were totally pulling the sort of garbage you see going on today.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        I went to college in the ’60s, when anti-war students were blowing up buildings to protest violence.

        Most college students are too busy trying to get laid or high or pass math to be a problem, but some are revolutionary idiots. Hey, it’s easy to be a revolutionary idiot when your greatest challenge is first period French.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Well, when I was young the media labeled us ‘Gen X’ (whatever that means) and if we weren’t mostly a bunch of thumb sucking liberals the media sure tried hard to paint us that way. We did grow up to be the Tea Party generation though, and we were at least smart enough not to eat Tide. Although it didn’t come in those colorful pods then.

    3. avatar CWT says:

      I turned 18 in 1983. I don’t seem to recall ever needing a safe space or trigger warnings. I never found the need to go into a safe space and play with playdoh and puppies when my candidate didn’t win the election. So ya I’ll go out on a limb and say I was more mature then the current crop of 18 year olds.

  30. avatar AaronW says:

    I have a few issues with this, not least of which is wondering what the thinking is behind that sort of age limit. Someone disturbed enough to want to do something like Parkland probably isn’t going to “grow out of it.” Nor does putting a rifle in the hands of a sub-21 year old cause them to begin conniving to kill.

    What worries me most about this sort of law is that if the Feds won’t do it, states and even municipalities might try it (excepting, of course, the cities in towns in ‘preemption’ states). And I’m concerned that they would go beyond merely limiting retail purchases and go on to include private sales, gifting, possibly even trying to interfere with the passing on of shooting traditions, even if it’s intra-familial mentorship.

  31. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

    Maybe someone in here can tell me. Of the media publicized shootings in past decade, which ones were the murderers under 21 and had legally obtained their firearm. This is the first I can recall.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      You could be correct. Google “young mass murderers” for a pretty comprehensive list from conservapedia.

      1. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

        I looked but it doesn’t give ages or information if the weapon was legally obtained.

        I am curious if there are other instances as I don’t waste that much time listening to every media detail of the shooters like some do. The media makes murderers into infamous villains and then everyone wants to be one. I call the unprovoked murderers crazy little lonely bedwetters that no one likes.

      2. avatar Porkchop says:

        Looking a little further into Everytown’s data, it looks like there were three under-21 long gun shootings in the study — in two of them, the shooter used his parents’ weapon, and in one, a prohibited person obtained a long gun through some illegal transaction. Cruz seems to be the first recent under-21 long-gun mass shooter who got his firearm by going out and buying it from a gun store.

    2. avatar Porkchop says:

      This is a solution in search of a problem. According to Everytown’s “Analysis of Recent Mass Shootings,” https://everytownresearch.org/documents/2015/09/analysis-mass-shootings.pdf (and why not use their statistics against them?) the median age of mass shooters is 34. Only 6% of mass shooters were under the age of 20, 14% 23 were 20-24, and 13% were 25-29. That means that 67% of mass shooters were 30 or older. It is not clear how the 20-24 group breaks down, but assuming an even distribution, we could guess that 20-year-olds separately might account for 2-3% of mass shootings, so this proposal would only affect perhaps 9-10% of mass shootings — and that assumes that all of those mass shootings were accomplished with long guns. But Everytown indicates that only approximately 11% of mass shootings were accomplished using “[h]igh-capacity magazines — or assault weapons likely equipped with them.” Again assuming an even distribution through age groups, this would mean that long guns were used by shooters in the under-21 demographic in about 1% of mass shootings.

      Of course, mass (or any) shootings are terrible, regrettable events, but this proposal is not likely to prevent future shootings.

      1. avatar Marty says:

        There are now laws that could be passed which would prevent mass shootings short of the government going house to house in every county in the entire country and stealing the folk’s guns. Even if they did it would be impossible to get them all. These kinds of mass murder occur all over the world and for the most part will continue. It makes no sense to even talk about gun control as there is to way it will work. It’s simply ‘feel good’ legislation with no teeth.

      2. avatar Porkchop says:

        Looking a little further into Everytown’s data, it looks like there were three under-21 long gun shootings in the study — in two of them, the shooter used his parents’ weapon, and in one, a prohibited person obtained a long gun through some illegal transaction. Cruz seems to be the first recent under-21 long-gun mass shooter who got his firearm by going out and buying it from a gun store.

  32. avatar Cornholio says:

    Yeah, and Stephen Paddock was 64. It is all just more feel-good BS that won’t make ANY difference.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Raise gun purchase limits to those over 65?

  33. avatar BlazinTheAmazin says:

    Being a good bit past the age of 21, I am fine making full adulthood with all rights, voting, gun purchases etc being obtained at that age. An exception can be made to an enlisted person below that age that receives their full rights upon completion of basic training.

    Driver’s permits for teenagers are still acceptable although maybe with stricter punishments for violators.

  34. avatar former water walker says:

    We wouldn’t even HAVE this question if ya’ know EVERYONE had vetted the Floriduh POS. I am opposed to 16 year old drivers but I can see lots of kids being mature and responsible to drive. Or own a rifle. My eldest son joined the military at 18 and went to hostile Mideast sh#tholes. He had “the right stuff”. Emotional post-shooting laws have no place in our “conversation”…

  35. avatar Anon in Ct says:

    OK, but only if they raise the voting age to match it.

  36. avatar Hank says:

    Sounds to me like the gun rights movement is dead, judging by this board. Just weeks ago we were pressing for less regulation, increasing gun rights victories. Still basking in the ultimate and amazing victory in 2016. We won so we wouldn’t have to bend over and take it up the ass. Yet here we are.

    Now look at ya’ll. Sitting around begging for scraps from Longshank’s table.

    1. avatar tiger says:

      Hank, it is a gun. Not a gold Calf idol we pray to.

      1. avatar Hank says:

        Oh I get the argument just fine. People under 21, bump stocks, background checks, are not the hill to die on. I agree. I’m not going to fight for those things. But make no mistake what’s coming after they get those things, that we’re offering as a sacrifice. Once you’ve paid the Dane geld, you’ll never be rid of the Dane.

  37. avatar EJQ says:

    I know that raising children who don’t carry a weapon illegally can be done, my spouse and I have managed to do it, and we’re far from rocket scientists. We have purchased long guns and hand guns for our son, also now nineteen. He’s purchased a couple of long guns since he’s been 18.

    Mostly, it was “You like guns? Then obey the law so you can continue to have them. One stupid thing could cause you to lose them for the rest of your life”

  38. avatar IN Dave says:

    Gun rights and voting are both in the constitution. Whatever age works for one, works for the other. Same goes for identification requirements for both.

  39. avatar Dale Gribble says:

    Hell no, I’m only 19 and don’t want to hurt anyone. Quit trying to steal my rights because of a few idiots.

  40. avatar Paul C says:

    These kids/young adults are constantly told and led to believe how important their feelings are. The reason, so they can be led to socialism against their evil cold parents’ wishes. They are teens and their inability to cope with their emotional roller coaster while being forced to attend an increasingly socialized institution that forces them to “fit in” while not they are not suited to go along with the groups that are the norm. Some of these students admitted to saying he was the type to commit this act, we’ve all seen those kind, but the reality is those kind are the typically bullied that’s why they are easy to spot. How many kids have been called a shooter type but have not ever been violent. I’m not saying they called it or they contributed, could be a little of both. Nothing in this guy’s life exonerates his act of evil. What if instead of his dark and lonely feelings overwhelming his personality he was able grow some thicker skin and a little self discipline through hard work and decent parenting. That is not allowed in our society and public schools in their current state. Schools are increasingly handling misbehavior inside instead of going to police and parents and this is happening in Doctors’ offices too. Liberals want your young teens having abortions and using drugs, they don’t want them to confide in parents but other liberal mindless bureaucrats only. In some states the hospital staff can not disclose that your child has used drugs or is asking for an abortion, but at 17 they can’t go to an appointment alone to get cough medicine. Meanwhile guns are less a part of children’s everyday life; they are increasingly becoming objects of fantasy and not the reality of safe handling and serious unchangeable consequences that come from use or misuse. Guns are items that are rated on strength and accuracy in video games scales and a means to power for the powerless in movies, but young people don’t have experience with firearms rooted in reality because they are continually vilified and tucked away into the corners of society.

    What’s stop an evil 21 year old? What would be next, 31, 41, 51….?

  41. avatar Marty says:

    I’m pretty sure 18 years of age is already the minimum to purchase a long gun, maybe not federally but certainly in every state I’ve been in. In the military,18 year olds are already shooting real assault weapons, fully automatic rifles. Yea, they are under supervision during training, but not nearly so much during war. I think they can generally handle semi autos.

  42. avatar Nanashi says:

    Lower it to zero.

    Remember the day the creator came to you and gave you the inalienable right to keep and bare arms? Neither do I. It’s a right you are born with. Anyone who does anything less than attempt to remove the existing restrictions is a traitor to his oath and has broken the most consistent lesson in the Bible: “Don’t lie to God”.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      Now we’re talking. If not only the teachers, but the KIDS were armed we wouldn’t have jack shit for mass shootings. No I’m not joking here. If we raised every kid with discapline and taught them to shoot straight by 16 schools would be one of worst places to attack.

    2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Remember the day the creator came to you and gave you the inalienable right to keep and bare arms?
      Well the creator will let you bare your arms.
      Actually the creator told me I could bear arms.

  43. avatar TroutsBane says:

    So what’s the argument, that their brains haven’t fully developed to know not to kill someone? Because if that’s the argument you should also raise the driving age for 2 ton vehicles of death. And obviously we will need to raise the voting age to twenty-one, because they lack the formation to be able to make responsible decisions.

  44. avatar Specialist38 says:

    I am shocked by the number of pissants on this forum that have drunk the koolaid and are spouting that 18-21/25 are basically infants.

    Just because many younger people are worthless slackers doesnt mean they shouldnt be expected to nut-up and contribute to our society.

    Echoing the social ellite’s talking points of “children” being at risk just re-inforces the nanny state idea that no one can be trusted to do anything without supervision.

    All the bitter, jaded asses on here that are willing to limit other’s right are no different than the left-wing turds trying to do the same.

    A right is a right, regardless of whether anyone is ready for it. If you can vote, you should be able to own a gun. If you commit a crime, you should pay the price. Or do you think that the young rabble is incapable of knowing enough to discern right from wrong.

    There is an epidemic of “I’ve got mine” here that has led to loss of much liberty in the past. You best be protecting other peoples rights. If it werent for all the 18-20 somethings voting guns, we would not have the gun rights we do today. Be carefull who you throw under the bus komrades.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      Yep. That’s how tyranny works. Go for different groups at a time to divide the resistance. That’s the whole line of reasoning for the “first they came for the…” poem. Y’all won’t defend the others, and by the time they get to your specific interests, it’ll be over.

  45. avatar PeterK says:

    I mean it works for alcohol, right?

    All this will do is increase the number of people being gifted guns. Maybe increase in straw purchases. No actual change in crime. It’s a great example of feel good nonsense.

  46. avatar Hank says:

    Maybe if we ban sales of guns to everyone, there would be less gun violence? Right?

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Start with the military and police, then the celebrity, rich, and politician armed bodyguards. See how that flies.

  47. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

    Perhaps combine a 21-year old age limit to buy centerfire semi-autos with a 21-year old age limit to buy SBRs, SBSs, AOWs, and suppressors with no idiotic ATF registration? The gun grabbers always claim that they want a “compromise”….

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      So they have to be 21 to be in the military?

      1. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

        Sure, add that in as well. I don’t like even the 21-year old requirement to buy handguns, but if we’re stuck with Trump and Republican politicians who are preparing to cave on the age for buying long guns, they might well consider taking a position that isn’t a complete rout. Then we get to see the gun grabbers try to explain why shortening the barrel and reducing the “high power” of an AR-15 makes it kill more, or how putting a stock or 2nd grip on a pistol turns it into a “weapon of war”.

  48. avatar Eli2016 says:

    It always fascinates me to see the pro-gun camp fight among themselves. The left is gonna push this agenda ’til the end of civilization. You have 8 million AR15’s out there plus a couple hundred million “other” guns and you are arguing about bump-stocks and raising the age limit on long arms. Two items that will not affect 99% of all present gun owners. Please tell me you guys (and gals) have more common sense than that. Otherwise you all are gonna lose everything. Or can’t you think that far ahead?

    1. avatar Ziptone says:

      Eli2016 you are confused, most of us are not pro-gun, we are pro-constitution. We are trying to define the peoples un-infringable right. The second most important rule to maintain a free society.

      You also seem to be confused about the word “fight”, that is why you think we will lose.

  49. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    Many school shooters are younger than 18.
    But what the he heck, let’s ban pretzels anyway!

    Yep. Congress is dysfunctional. Your crazy aunt makes more sense.

  50. avatar Stereodude says:

    As long as we enforce that same age on getting an abortion (without parental consent), undergoing any sort of gender change, voting, driving, smoking, drinking, entering legal contracts, age of consent, etc.

  51. avatar TP says:

    *If they do that then they also need to raise entry into the military and voting age to 21.

  52. avatar Jack Moore says:

    If there is any reason whatsoever, that you can not be trusted to have a gun, you are absolutely not responsible enough to vote. The 2nd amendment isn’t in some special “not as good as the other rights” section of the constitution. If you establish with society that you can’t be trusted with 2nd amendment rights you can’t be trusted with any rights.

  53. avatar bobo says:

    Yep raising the buy age to 21 that law will work?

    It’s not like some nutter kid hellbent on shooting up the school can not add 2 and 2 and maybyyyyy plan a little?
    you know?
    have some money and via the net buy a 80% lower, a vise, jig, drill, drill bits and the rest of a AR15 and like like like do it themselves??

    but you know kids–they can’t think–right………………..

  54. avatar Tom says:

    The constitution does not state the right bear arms shall not be infringed … if you’re an ‘adult’, if you’re deamed ‘mentally competent’ by your peers, if you’re over age X, if you pass some arbitrary background check, etc. The framers of the constitution had to know there were screw balls in the world that you didnt want to have a gun, I’m sure the 1700’s were not devoid of socio/psychopaths. Yet… they clearly chose to leave the right completely unrestricted. Why? I would suggest they knew that allowing any restrictions would lead to many restrictions – which would ultimately negate the purpose of having the second amendment – to guarantee the people can defend themselves from tyranny. The specificity and finality of ‘shall not be infringed’ is extremely important in showing how the founding fathers felt about firearms.

    We do not say that the fundamental guaranteed right of free speech starts at 18, nor do we say that of free press, or religion. The right bear arms should be no different. I see mention of driving and drinking – those are not rights they are priviledges and are completely different. The right to vote isnt even guaranteed by the constitution but was added for those over 18 and meeting other requirements in a series of amendments to the constitution.

    You should be able to buy a gun at any age. You should be able to get one if you’re 1 brick short of a load. You should be able to buy one if you’re a convicted fellon, spouse beater, child molester or any other loon or miscreant you can think of. No gun law will prevent any of those people from obtaining one or using it in a crime. If a person is a danger enough to his neighbors that he shouldnt be able to buy, posses or own a gun then they should not be roaming free where they have the ability to buy, posses or own one – thats what jails, electric chairs and execution drugs are for – to seperate (permanently when warranted) the dangererous from the non dangerous. There should not be a single person roaming the streets that is known to be so dangerous that they can’t own a gun, or that has to register his whereabouts with local law enforcement. In fact, parole hearings could be reduced to one question… Do i trust this person with a gun? Yes… you go, no … you stay.

    I understand the supreme court has ruled the second amendment is not an absolute right (whatever that means), but their mistake does not change the fact that the second amendment was written to guarantee the good can protect themselves from evil because evil will never be deterrred or eliminated no matter what you do.. A guarantee with restrictions is no guarantee at all and being on the side of good, I’d prefer the guarantee.

  55. avatar Ret1SG says:

    No! Bought my first rifle at 14 (1968). 1894 Winchester octagon barreled .30-.30.

  56. avatar Sal Chichon says:

    If you are old enough to be drafted into the military (“Hi, I’m Uncle Sam, and I own your body.”), then you’re old enough to have a rifle of your own. I don’t like this, “old enough for the bullshit, but not old enough for the benefits,” double standard.

    If an 18 y.o. adult can theoretically enlist in the military, and can be pushing a mine roller attached to an MRAP before he’s 19, then – goddamnit – he can purchase a rifle as an 18 y.o. civilian.

    If a young man is old enough to be tried as an adult, then he’s old enough for a rifle.

    If a young man is considered of age to enter into contract, then he’s old enough to own his own rifle.

  57. avatar Hannibal says:

    What happens when the next shooter is 22?

    Is this the Trump you voted for?

  58. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    I’ve heard gun control advocates argue that potential long gun buyers younger than 21 aren’t mature enough to purchase a long gun. Their brains aren’t fully formed. They’re naive. Lack impulse control. Etc.
    So why do we allow people younger than 21 in the military?

  59. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    I thought we went through something similar to this during the Vietnam War?

  60. avatar Logic or Bust says:

    Bad guys who want guns get them. Either via the black market import (mostly from the Philippines–look up Filipino ghost guns in the US), or through the black market manufacture:









    So we’ve established bad guys can just friggen make the things or have them made.

    In countries where it’s already illegal to buy/own them.

    Now that we have proven this, that the willing bad guy can and will get their hands on them…we ask the anti-gun liberal: So then how do we stop the bad guys with guns when any/all laws don’t/wont?

    (or how to cause a critical fault in the mind of a liberal)

  61. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    I’ve got two things to say about this:

    First, what is being considered is basically punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty.

    Second, I am concerned that the antis have once again taken control of the narrative and here we are considering the pros and cons of their various ill considered ‘solutions’. I say, screw that, what part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand?

  62. avatar Tec's Dad says:

    I think there are mature 18 yos and there are immature 21 yos; At 21 you can buy a handgun at 18 you can buy a rifle or shotgun, in certain states…what happened here is a wackjob fell through the cracks, the police had been to his house 39 times, he was investigated for making threats, etc, etc… if the agencies that investigate threats do not enter proper information, like the shooter at the church in Texas, he was prohibited from ownership by his crime but info was never enter…the system is only as good or bad as the information that is entered or not entered… these crimes were avoidable if proper data entry was done… garbage in garbage out… changing the age will stop 18, 19 and 20 year olds from buying guns, period. Will that lessen any impact on crime? Doubt it.. but the politicians will make feelgood soundbites and until proper reporting is followed through with not much is gonna change

  63. avatar HiddenHills says:

    OK…. Make minimum military service enlistment age the same as gun purchase age….

  64. avatar PopOley says:

    Freaking hell no!!! Have you idiots lost your collective minds?

    No, repeat no, further restrictions on the God-given right to self-defense!

    I trust my twelve year old to handle his rifle with care and precision. He has been raised to act like a man. If his peers are infantile fools, he should lose his rights to their foolishness? Hell no!

    My uncle went into the Marine Corps at age 16 and fought across the Pacific at 17. He was a rifleman before the Corps and a killer for his country well before the age of 21. Do we surrender the freedoms he fought for because Americans have raised a generation unfit to bear the name? Hell no!

    Screw your heads on straight and stop acting like a bunch of frightened lemmings!

  65. avatar Cloudbuster says:

    If you’re going to raise the age to buy a gun, raise the voting age, raise the selective service eligibility age (or age eligible to join military?), raise the age of adulthood for criminal prosecution. If they’re not mature enough to own a gun or to drink (as laws already assume), then they’re not mature enough to do any of those other things.

    Apparently, for insurance purposes, kids aren’t adults until 26. I’d actually be pretty happy if the voting age was raised to match that. The ballot box is a lot more dangerous than the ammo box on a day-to-day basis in a democratic republic.

    1. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

      I believe that the 26-year age for staying on parents’ insurance was to stop a particular scam where young people could be covered on their parents’ policy while in college (and thus presumably not earning enough to afford to pay premiums, but were dropped if they became too sick to continue classes (at which point they had a pre-existing condition and couldn’t get coverage).

  66. avatar sound awake says:

    ill willingly trade age 21 for long guns for age 21 for abortions

    20% of all abortions are by women younger than 21

    thats 200,000 babies that can be saved every year

    80,000 of those babies would be black which makes me racist

    but i digress…

    of course i only offer this up because obviously this is the ultimate parlor game as the democrats would never ever ever go for it

    which shows you exactly what theyre all about


    if the us army invaded another country and did same exact things to the women and babies there what planned parenthood does to women and babies here it would be called war crimes and crimes against humanity and there absolutely would be tribunals and hangings

    i refuse to be shamed and guilt tripped into action anymore by the party of baby killers and uninhibited and unrepentant sexual deviance and moral depravity

  67. then you can”t vote or be drafted until your 21

  68. avatar Sam in Ohio says:

    Voting age is 18 because of Vietnam and the draft: “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote” or something similar.

    Drinking age is 21 based upon the “theory” that it will reduce binge drinking, drunken driving, etc. I’m not sure that theory is correct because underage people still get alcohol (Insert gun control analogy here) and I’m pretty sure people have some pretty spectacular hangovers the day after they turn 21.

    Of course, I don’t have anything from the CDC to prove or disprove the theory that a 21year old drinking age accomplishes its stated goal, but i’m sure that if there is a CDC study it was conducted with the same degree of care and accuracy that is given to the annual formulation of the flu vaccine. 36% accurate/effective sound about right?

    I’m not sure there’s a scintilla of evidence to support the theory that raising the age to buy a long gun to 21will actually prevent a school shooting. I think there is at least some evidence that school shooters acquire their firearm(s) via theft from a relative or via a straw buyer just like most criminals do. That would seem to suggest that raising the age to 21 will not be effective in preventing another school shooting, but so long as ‘They’re doing something”…

  69. avatar Ed of the North says:

    Whatever the age for buying a long gun (how many of the mass killers are under 21 anyway, or too honest to steal a gun?), none of this touches the fundamental issue: exactly what problem is solved by limiting long gun sales to 21 and over? Even if some kind of magic made all guns disappear, do you want a 19 yr old who has shown clear signs of severe mental instability and threatened to kill people on multiple occasions to be free to walk into your kid’s school, or anywhere else? This law won’t change that. He won’t be holding a gun, but what will he be carrying?

    Did we make knives, machetes, gasoline, homebrew explosives, large motor vehicles, etc. go away? All the publicity goes to the shooters now, but as soon as one wacko shows a new gory way to kill a crowd (and the media publicizes it far and wide), the wackos aren’t going to limit themselves to guns anymore.

    The whole premise of the question should be rejected. Unless you can go back in time, raising the age to 21 will save nobody.

    1. avatar tiger says:

      Ok, Then The Assault weapon ban returns. Status quo is not going to fly.

    2. avatar Terry Weaver says:

      NO TO AGE RESTRICTION Our 17-18 year old men and women join the military!

  70. avatar Oh noes says:

    It’s the strategy do something benign and useless to give the appearance of taking action on gun control to prevent More restrictive “Assault weapons ban”

  71. avatar Roy F. Wilt says:


  72. avatar Terry Weaver says:

    Beer runs, cigarettes, pot, buying guns at street corners, hookers, sex in back seats, all take place without regard to AGE! Wake up America stop bitching, Rules are always broken, just return to your youth days? Nothing New!

  73. avatar Joe R. says:

    Not just NO, FV<K No.

    Need a good reason?

    FU, you gotta give me one to change it.

  74. avatar GW says:

    Just raise the age to 556 says the gun ban crowd!

    Background checks don’t work and are also costly. They can add, for instance, north of $150 to the cost of a gun in Washington, D.C. That fee can put guns out of reach for the most likely victims of violent crime, such as poor minorities living in high-crime areas. These costs may explain the finding that these checks actually increase some types of crime.

    Given that Democrats keep pushing for laws after each mass shooting before we even know the facts of the case and that they have nothing to do with these attacks, one may wonder if there are any ulterior motives. Making it costly for the poor to own guns is one explanation

  75. avatar GoD says:

    https://goo.gl/RBSbXC @ 10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes

    Weapons of War the Anti-Gunners Scream and why they fail to acknowledge this and other Supreme Court Rulings and the meaning of the 2nd Amendment.

    United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), was a Supreme Court case that involved a Second Amendment challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934

    On March 30, 1939,

    The Supreme Court heard the case and argued:

    The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia.

    The Supreme Court in 1856 implicitly reaffirmed the law-abiding person’s civil right to be armed, when it declared that the government, had no duty to protect the average person.

    https://goo.gl/mFJRrn @
    ♦ U.S. v. Miller strongly suggests that bans on military-type firearms, ammunition, and magazines are unconstitutional, as these devices plainly are central to the militia/military

  76. avatar #2aAFALLDAY says:

    All you so called #2a activist are you all on social media daily putting out the #progun message?

    If ur a gun owner and freedom loving American u should be!

    10 yo girls master all the social media platforms can’t u grown ass men and women?

    Lets ban school shooting and all criminals will comply……right?

    Well….. banning stairs and bathtubs would save many lives!

    Lets ban Drunk driving!

    Lets ban drugs that worked out great!

    And those assault spoons are killing so many people with diabetes,heart disease etc…..MILLIONS!!!

    Join the GOA!
    The NRA is just interested in money and giving enuff of our rights away so they can scream gun ban…..give us money ….it has become their great scam. You
    don’t give in on My Civil Rights to protect myself and self defense of my children!
    The GOA does not comprise! Compromising with a Anti-gun person is like trusting
    a wolf to leave ur sheep alone! They want it all
    Set a Reminder! Write and call ur reps hourly,daily please.Thanks!
    OR VOTE FOR………….EVER!!!!!

    Will banning pencils and keyboards stop Misspellings?

    Don’t argue with anti-gun people engage them with facts that are on our side!

    Thanks for supporting Gun Rights,America and our Veterans and Military!

  77. avatar Tyce says:

    I took responsibility for my own life at the age of 12. It was the best thing my father ever did for me. The age of responsibility needs to be LOWERED not raised. The drinking age of 21 has been a disaster because college students don’t suffer the wrath of their parents. Young adults (12 to 15) who Act-up should go to detention, 16 and up, to jail. They can petition to recover their rights when 18.

    The primarily culpable party for the highly preventable Stoneman Douglas mass murder is the Broward County School District which shields students from law enforcement. They didn’t learn their lesson with Trayvon Martin now they are responsible for 17 more deaths.

    The only compromise I would consider is lowering the pistol age to 18 in exchange for limiting high capacity mags to 21 and above. Of course that will never happen because none of this about safety, or right or wrong, it’s the politics of the continuous subversion of the Bill of Rights.

    1. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

      Didn’t Mr. Martin go to school in Miami-Dade Co.?

  78. avatar Gonzo says:

    A bit late to the party here but simply raising the age restriction may help honestly I don’t know. To me the biggest x factor here is mental health things like schizophrenia tend not to really rear their ugly head until early 20s is this one of the causes of school shootings? Your guess is as good as mine. My main thought is kids are more an more frequently being given amphetamines (ADHD meds) as early as 10 and often after that being medicated with antidepressants that can have any number of side affects in high school. In addition people who tend to have problems that get medicated also tend to self medicate with drugs and alcohol. We currently don’t have the research to know what combination of the above factors have a meaningful impact on a person’s propensity for violence. I think another major factor is our current economy lots of people don’t have hope. I think it’s likely the current administration may decide to up the age limit whether it will have any good affect remains to be seen. Personally I think if someone is dead set on commiting mass mayhem they likely will do it regardless of gun laws. Being someone who works in the tech field I think ultimately in the next few years there will likely be a massive program to monitor troubled individuals online behavior think prism to hopefully help prevent stuff like this but the privacy concerns are worrying and should be.

  79. avatar John Memoli says:

    I just had a thought, if all this unconstitutional hub-bub about raising the age to buy a rifle to 21 was about saving teenager lives, then why aren’t we talking about raising the driving age to 21. In 2014 alone, teenage drivers killed 4272 people while driving. In total, since 1966 teenage shooters have killed less than 2000 people. If you useful idiots want to bravely march, lets see you march to take away your own driving privileges. Politicians using these fools in hope of future votes should be embarrassed,

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email