As far as constitutionally protected rights go, the right to bear arms is the only one that is largely infringed upon because of an American adult’s age. Various laws curtailing the Second Amendment rights of 18- to 20-year-olds have been fought over at the state level for the past several years.
Now, one such struggle is taking place in Congress. As Democrats seek to make it illegal for adults under 21 to purchase a common semi-automatic rifle, Republicans in the Senate are trying to do away with the infringement banning 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds from purchasing handguns.
Earlier this week, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, introduced a measure that would raise the minimum age to buy so-called “assault weapons” and misnamed “high-capacity” ammunition magazines from 18 to 21.
“Everyone in America should be able to live free from the fear of injury or death caused by a firearm,” Sen. Kaine said in a press release announcing the action. “One of many common-sense steps we can take to reduce that risk is limiting young people’s access to assault weapons—just like we already limit their access to handguns.”
As the National Shooting Sports Foundation pointed out in late 2023, there are more Modern Sporting Rifles (NSSF’s term for what antis call “assault weapons”) in circulation than there are Ford F-150s trucks on the road. By any figure, that’s a firearm that’s commonly owned, commonly used and protected “arms” under the Second Amendment.
Despite that fact, the bill lowering the age to 18 is being pushed by a who’s who of gun-ban groups, including March for Our Lives, Giffords, Newtown Action Alliance, Everytown for Gun Safety and Brady, formerly called Handgun Control Inc.
Meanwhile, in the U.S. House of Representatives, Republicans are making a push to recognize the infringed-upon rights of 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds. On February 27, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, reintroduced the Second Amendment for Every Registrable (SAFER) Voter Act, which would lower the age from 21 to 18 for purchasing a handgun from a federal firearms licensee (FFL).
Rep. Massie announced the measure, HR 1643, on Facebook, posting, “I just reintroduced the Second Amendment for Every Registrable Voter Act, HR 1643. The SAFER Voter Act would repeal the federal law that prevents voting-age adults, 18 to 20, from purchasing a handgun from a FFL.”
In a press release about the measure, Rep. Massie asked a poignant question: “Why should a 20-year-old single mom be denied the right to defend herself and her children?”
“18-, 19- and 20-year-olds are considered adults and can vote on important public policy issues,” Rep. Massie continued. “They can also form business contracts, get married and serve in the military. As adults, these Americans should not be deprived of basic constitutional rights.”
One pro-gun rights group to quickly embrace the measure was Gun Owners of America (GOA).
“The current 18 to 20-year-old handgun ban says that the Second Amendment is a second-class right, relegated to the backwaters of the Constitution,” said Aidan Johnson, GOA director of federal affairs. “Gun-grabbers believe that if they can disarm young people in the years prior to turning 21, they can discourage and depress gun ownership for a new generation of Americans. That’s why Rep. Thomas Massie’s SAFER Voter Act is so important because it restores the right of young adults to purchase handguns for self-defense.”
The white for the font over the article titles on the front page is a horrible choice.
I agree. They’ve had several similar “thumbnails” since the “new & improved” look was implemented. White text on a light blue background, white text on light beige background, etc. It’s almost like no one is looking at the results on an actual phone. Also, I’m not liking the enormous string of large photo links to other articles before the comments.
Study: Concealed Carriers Do A Better Job Of Stopping Active Shooters Than Police.
https://thefederalist.com/2025/03/11/study-concealed-carriers-do-a-better-job-of-stopping-active-shooters-than-police/
I could happily entertain a rational discussion of the general topic “What should the ‘age of majority’ be?” – that is a discussion worth having (which we, politically, dodge on BOTH sides, depending on whose ox is being gored). Worthy discussion.
The somewhat unique American approach of treating ‘age of majority’ differently for different topics is objectively insane. If you are ‘old enough’ to exercise sovereign franchise (i.e., vote) then you are damn well old enough to drink, or buy or carry guns. People can do FAR more damage with their vote than they can with a gun or a car.
Only idiots like MajorLiar (and dacian the demented, when that troll was still around) can ‘argue’ against that. Pick an age, and STICK WITH IT. I can make the argument for, or against, any age from 16 to 25, and (obviously) it varies from person to person (but you can’t make laws based on that), but IF we’re going to have an age requirement, let’s at least be rational about it, eh??
Hell yea Lamp. I have been saying this for years. You are old enough to sign a contract to send your off to the sandbox to fight and die, but as soon as you get home you can’t carry, get a drink, or have a smoke.
“I could happily entertain a rational discussion of the general topic “What should the ‘age of majority’ be?””
Preach it, Lamp.
Let’s bait ’em, tell them we want to to raise the age to buy a gun to age 26, the official ‘Obama Care’ age of adulthood.
And then spring on them that’s also gonna be the age for smoking, drinking, signing contracts, etc.
I can dream, can’t I? 🙂
There is no mention of an age requirement anywhere in the 2nd amendment. In 1968 I was (like many Revolutionary War soldiers) drafted into the military. Within days I was issued a FULLY AUTOMATIC rifle. I was 19 years old at the time!
T TAG
Testing
.
Man this TTAG is all screwed up.
In 1971 I became a police officer at 20. Even though I carried an issue weapon I could not buy one until I turned 21! I was fully qualified and had graduated from the Police Academy!