fpc firearms policy coalition
Previous Post
Next Post

From the Firearms Policy Coalition . . .

Yesterday, counsel for Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a motion for a preliminary injunction and expedited trial on the merits in a federal court case, Lara v. Evanchick, challenging Pennsylvania’s ban on handgun carry as to adults under the age of 21. The motion can be found at FPCLegal.org.

The brief, filed by Cooper & Kirk, Joshua Prince, and FPC Director of Legal Strategy Adam Kraut, argues that Pennsylvania’s laws not only criminalize the carry of loaded, operable firearms by the plaintiffs, it prevents them from acquiring a license to carry, completely foreclosing their exercise of the fundamental right to bear arms. That policy, they say, is flatly unconstitutional, foreclosed by the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court’s precedents, and must be enjoined.

“The constitution guarantees the right of all law-abiding, adult citizens to carry firearms for self-defense,” explained Pete Patterson of Cooper & Kirk. “Pennsylvania’s flat denial of this right to 18-20-year-old adults cannot be squared with this constitutional guarantee.”

“Our law-abiding adult clients, and all young adults in the Commonwealth, have a fundamental constitutional right to carry and transport firearms, but Pennsylvania’s discriminatory law prevents them from getting a license to carry. And especially now, in the state of emergency declared by Governor Wolf, they cannot carry in any manner at any time whatsoever. That is unconstitutional and offensive to our founding principles,” said attorney Joshua Prince of the Civil Rights Defense Firm.

“The Commonwealth’s criminal laws, combined with the State’s ban on applying for and acquiring a license to carry, amount to a total ban on the right and ability of our law-abiding adult clients to carry a firearm outside of their home for self-defense,” said FPC’s Adam Kraut. “The destruction of the right to bear arms outside the home for individuals who are over the age of eighteen but not yet twenty-one defies logic and squarely flies in the face of the Second Amendment.”

“This case and our other lawsuits challenging age-based bans are about fighting for the rights of America’s young adults, protecting the rights and liberties of future generations, and restoring the Second Amendment for all individuals,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “The rights of young people are incredibly important to FPC, and that is why we have made fighting for them a priority in our broader strategy to advance individual liberty and freedom.”

Recently, Firearms Policy Coalition has filed several major federal Second Amendment lawsuits, including challenges to the State of Pennsylvania’s and Allegheny County’s carry restrictions (Cowey v. Mullen), Philadelphia’s Gun Permit Unit policies and practices (Fetsurka v. Outlaw),California’s Handgun Ban and “Roster” laws (Renna v. Becerra), Maryland’s carry ban (Call v. Jones), New Jersey’s carry ban (Bennett v. Davis), New York City’s carry ban (Greco v. New York City), the federal ban on the sale of handguns and handgun ammunition by federal firearm licensees (FFLs) to adults under 21 years of age (Reese v. BATFE), and others, with many more cases being prepared today. To follow these and other legal cases FPC is actively working on, visit the Legal Action section of FPC’s website or follow FPC on InstagramTwitterFacebookYouTube.

The Lara v. Evanchick case is another important lawsuit filed as part of FPC’s comprehensive strategy to defend freedom, advance individual liberty, and restore the Constitution and its guarantees for individuals throughout the United States. Individuals who wish to support the lawsuit can do so at JoinFPC.org and www.firearmspolicy.org/lara.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. The state I reside in has Constitutional Carry, however I’m not particularly enthusiast about 18 year olds carrying a handgun.

    • And if society is not enthusiastic about 18 year olds practicing their faith/religion, should we discourage/ban them from doing it?

    • If they can vote, go to war (join military) and are considered an adult at 18, they should be allowed to carry a gun. There is no “…but” in the second amendment.

      • considered by whom? they can vote, but should not be able to. i know some exemplary young folks, but they are in the minority. military service is a false equivalence. drinking, too soon. driving, well in rural areas for sure, tough to justify that though.
        as long as 18 is legally major then qualified individuals should be able to purchase, own and carry.

    • I did not fudd they can not have them. I just said I’m not enthusiastic about it. You have to admit at 18 a person has not had the years of life experience and tolerance of others as even a 30 year old. The Army this and that, so when you were in, the Army just handed you a set of BDU’s, a box of bullets and a rifle, back to barracks sleep tight. Yes you can vote at 18 because your vote is not directly aiming a firearm at someone, and if it is , it carries the votes of a majority.
      Driving cars with a license, nuff said.
      Let’s take it a step further.- – I can get a drivers license, join the army, vote, carry a gun, now why at 18 can’t I walk into a liquor store and buy a bottle of vodka?

      • Why not allow 18 year old’s to buy alcohol, indeed? Do you think drinking is a bigger responsibility than voting?

        In the immortal words of Don Henley “A man with a briefcase can steal more money than any man with a gun.”

        Voting is pointing guns at people. Government is pointing guns at people. Voting just decides who will be in government and thus who will be pointing guns at who (whom? I can never remember). All government and all laws are backed up by the threat of force. If you don’t comply and continue to not comply and resist through increasing enforcement measures eventually they will shoot you. If anything at all should be relegated to higher arbitrary ages voting would be it.

        While we’re at it we should probably remove the vote from net tax consumers and limit votes to one per household.

        As for the majority, fuck the majority. A majority, any majority, doesn’t get to decide on my rights or how I can or can’t live my life. Understanding abuse by the majority is the entire reason the whole founding generation eschewed the idea of democracy and created a constitutional federal republic instead. The majority and democracy are just mob rule and the constitution was created to protect those not in the majority from the majority, from the mob.

    • “…however I’m not particularly enthusiast about 18 year olds carrying a handgun.”

      This is how we force the Leftists to shut the fuck up about allowing 16 year-olds to vote –

      If they are so convinced 16 year-olds can handle the adult responsibility and maturity to vote, then they have the maturity and responsibility to buy and carry a loaded handgun in public.

      That will shut them up in record time. With that logic, we might even be able to use that to push the voting age up to 21… 😉

      • Geof,
        Amen. 16 year old vote equals 16 year old gun permits. Convinced felon vote equals convicted felon gun permits. Either they are citizens with Rights, or they’re not. All or none.

  2. In MA, 18-21s cannot obtain a License to Carry (handguns), but can obtain an FID for long guns. In fact, with parental consent, they can obtain an FID at 15. The thing is, the requirements and background checks are the same for an FID as for an LTC. So if 18-21s pass the background check, have a clean record and pass the training requirement, tell me again why 18-21s can’t carry a handgun.

Comments are closed.