Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should firearms be banned for persons under 21?
Yes. 58 29.29%
Yes, but only if voting age is raised to 21 as well. 31 15.66%
No. 104 52.53%
All firearms should be made illegal, get rid of all guns. 5 2.53%
Voters: 198. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,054 posts, read 10,609,027 times
Reputation: 9684

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by VikingsToValhalla View Post
I'm in favor of banning under 21'ers from buying or owning firearms.
Humans' brains continue to mature until their early 20s.
Teenagers make too many irrational & impulsive decisions.

I think a under 21 ban would help prevent some of these school shootings done by teenagers and help prevent some teen suicides.

I'm also in favor of increasing the voting age to 21 as well.
As I stated, the human brain does not fully mature until a person is in their 20's.
If we can't trust teenagers with alcohol or guns, why should we trust them with voting?
Because a minuscule number of 18-21 year olds break the law, your solution is to lump all 18-21 year olds together and call them guilty by association? Ok, let’s look at this with a different group and see what you think. Warning: you’re probably gonna get angry at me.

The majority of gun crimes in this country take place in urban areas and are committed by people of color. Should we make it illegal for minorities to own firearms? It would, according to your logic, drastically reduce the number of gun crimes. Would you support such a restriction? Why or why not?

Frankly, this is the dumbest idea I’ve yet heard when it comes to gun control. And I’ve heard a lot of dumb ideas over the years. What you’re doing is called profiling, and it’s frowned upon by the Constitution, the SCOTUS, and the majority of people who have anything resembling common sense.

There are millions of 18-21 year olds, not to mention younger individuals, who safely and responsibly use firearms on a daily basis. There are a tiny, tiny minority of delusional teenagers, mainly those raised in dysfunctional households, who are willing to do evil things with a firearm. You don’t punish the majority for the actions of the minority - unless you’re a friend of fascism like the Democrats embrace.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:36 AM
 
33,737 posts, read 16,721,651 times
Reputation: 17035
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
Because a minuscule number of 18-21 year olds break the law, your solution is to lump all 18-21 year olds together and call them guilty by association? Ok, let’s look at this with a different group and see what you think. Warning: you’re probably gonna get angry at me.

.
I would fine tune it to:

1) No guns until 21 UNLESS

a) You have finished one year post secondary education in the top 25% of your class, and are currently enrolled full-time

or

b) You have worked at minimum 2,080 hours the last 52 weeks, and are still a full-time scheduled employee, at a job paying at least your state's median income for all adults.


The 18-21 group today IMO is split sharply between winners and losers. The latter festering with like minded anti social radicals all day cannot be trusted at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,054 posts, read 10,609,027 times
Reputation: 9684
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
I would fine tune it to:

1) No guns until 21 UNLESS

a) You have finished one year post secondary education in the top 25% of your class, and are currently enrolled full-time

or

b) You have worked at minimum 2,080 hours the last 52 weeks, and are still a full-time scheduled employee, at a job paying at least your state's median income for all adults.

So you’d be perfectly fine with applying those same rules to minorities? No firearm without post secondary education and/or gainful employment? How long do you think it would take SCOTUS to toss that law? For that matter, how long would it take for the first judge who got the case to toss it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:48 AM
 
Location: A Beautiful DEEP RED State
5,632 posts, read 1,747,351 times
Reputation: 3902
If you want to ban guns for anyone under 21, then raise the age to drive, enlist and vote to 21 as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:49 AM
 
33,737 posts, read 16,721,651 times
Reputation: 17035
[quote=JimRom;63528414]
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
I would fine tune it to:

1) No guns until 21 UNLESS

a) You have finished one year post secondary education in the top 25% of your class, and are currently enrolled full-time

or

b) You have worked at minimum 2,080 hours the last 52 weeks, and are still a full-time scheduled employee, at a job paying at least your state's median income for all adults.


So you’d be perfectly fine with applying those same rules to minorities? No firearm without post secondary education and/or gainful employment? How long do you think it would take SCOTUS to toss that law? For that matter, how long would it take for the first judge who got the case to toss it?
I would be. I also think SCOTUS would allow it. We must pass drivers tests to get licenses, with age restrictions, sight restrictions, etc. We have Blood alcohol driving restrictions. We'd be hard pressed to find unrestricted rights. Heck, can't scream fire in a crowded theater w/o doing jail time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Rochester, WA
14,306 posts, read 11,772,793 times
Reputation: 38430
Quote:
Originally Posted by TamaraSavannah View Post
No, none of this half way, they either are or they are not.

This is a picture of some graduating high school class:
https://dpa730eaqha29.cloudfront.net...7975924160.jpg

Say you are a rapist and you now know they are out there, without a means to protect themselves, and worse, legally, they are not children so the penalty for doing them harm is not as great.

They either are or they are not. If the State is not going to allow them the means to defend themselves, then the State must protect them.

This... Are they adults, setting up their own households, or are they children? I would not deny the right of millions of young people who are living on their own to defend themselves, because of the behavior of a tiny tiny fraction of a percentage who commit these acts. 18-21 year olds are already prevented from owning handguns in many states, and they probably shouldn't be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
11,054 posts, read 10,609,027 times
Reputation: 9684
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post

I would be. I also think SCOTUS would allow it. We must pass drivers tests to get licenses, with age restrictions, sight restrictions, etc. We have Blood alcohol driving restrictions. We'd be hard pressed to find unrestricted rights. Heck, can't scream fire in a crowded theater w/o doing jail time.
You think SCOTUS would uphold a law that specifically limited the rights of minorities?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 10:59 AM
 
5,371 posts, read 3,384,539 times
Reputation: 9001
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post

Our 2nd Amendment rights ensure that citizens MUST have the ability to defend themselves against the govt and/or agents of the govt!
I hadn't heard that this recent school shooter was defending himself against the govt/or agents of the govt. Can you please provide a link?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 11:01 AM
 
33,737 posts, read 16,721,651 times
Reputation: 17035
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
You think SCOTUS would uphold a law that specifically limited the rights of minorities?
It would not be ethnicity specific. Anyone with the grades can handle college. Anyone can work full time with a solid work ethic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-30-2022, 11:01 AM
 
26,776 posts, read 15,022,542 times
Reputation: 11832
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
There was a time when citizens could legally buy machine guns though, and oddly these types of shootings didnt happen back then? Hmm makes you wonder what the real purpose is in restricting automatic weapons, huh?


Not to mention, making your own 'machine gun' is MUCH simpler than a semi auto! Open bolt slam fire, no expensive machinery needed, all the parts can be obtained at a hardware store, or a Lowes/ Home Depot.
At one time you could mail order a Thompson for $27..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top