(photo belongs to me)
Hey guys, here's another topic that's hot in the media right now and I'm curious to what you guys think about it?
Currently the age to buy a handgun in the U.S. is 21 years old and to buy a rifle is only 18 years old. Now this hasn't really been an issue until here recently with all of the nonsense going on.
I've had mixed emotions about this in the past but especially here lately, my opinion is changing somewhat.
Times have changed folks and we need to adapt with the times.
I used to think that if you were old enough to join the military and serve your country, then you should be able to legally buy alcohol and a gun if you wanted to. I know that's a bad combination putting the two together but hopefully you get my point.
Well, my opinion has changed about that. Back when the age restriction laws were put in place for buying a rifle, we didn't have the type of weapons that we have today. I'm sure the reasoning for leaving the age at 18 for rifles was due to hunting purposes and most of your rifles being sold in stores were actually "hunting rifles". For the purposes of this article, I'm referring to hunting rifles as like a bolt action rifle. I'm fully aware that you can knit pick and say "Well you can hunt with an SKS." which is true but you guys know what I mean and this article isn't about classifying weapons or putting them in a specific category.
I was once 18 years old believe it or not! I was really mature for my age and actually became a supervisor at the plant that I was working at. Even though I was mature and responsible, I was still only 18 years old and I done a lot of stupid things. Think about how you were when you were 18.
Believe me when I say this... I do NOT believe in the government controlling every little thing in our lives and I'm a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment. But I have reservations about an 18 year old boy being able to go out and buy a semi-auto rifle with a 100 round drum.
So what's the difference in an 18 year old joining the military and using fully automatic weapons? Am I saying that he's old enough to use these weapons in the military but he can't buy one as a civilian?
Well for starters, when a young man joins the military, he goes through extensive training with his weapons. This same young man is under heavy supervision by professionals. Right there is your difference. An 18 year old in the military is being trained in how to responsibly handle that weapon. Your normal 18 year old civilian will more than likely not seek any type of professional training.
I have been pondering on this subject and one idea that I have is to leave the age restriction as it is BUT attach an amendment where the 18 year old has to have either a parent or someone that is 21 years of age or older to more or less co-sign for him/her.
Does that sound stupid, having to co-sign for a rifle at age 18? To me it doesn't. And by a parent or other person vouching for the buyer, it puts extra responsibility out there and gets peoples wheels turning and it just might prevent a troubled teen from going out and buying a gun for the wrong reasons.
Did you know that you used to could buy rifles via mail-order?
Yes sir! You could order a rifle right out of the back of a magazine if you wanted to!
Did you know that President Kennedy was assassinated with a rifle that was purchased via mail-order?
Sure as hell was and that's what prompted new gun control laws to take effect in the 1960's.
What's my point for mentioning the aforementioned fact? My point is that we have to change with the times. And UNFORTUNATELY because of some irresponsible and sick people, we have to change some things or amend some laws to try and protect our fellow man.
If you know anything about me, you know that I have a passion for weapons. The picture in this article shows just of a few of my weapons. I love all types of firearms from military style, hunting, precision, sport, concealed, antique or whatever. I don't want anymore laws or restrictions than the next guy but unfortunately, a few bad apples is ruining it for the rest of us. At least with my idea, an 18 year old can still purchase a rifle if he wants to, he will just have to have someone vouch for him.
I'm curious what you guys think? Feel free to let me know in the comments if you think my idea is a good one or not, you won't hurt my feelings.
As always, I appreciate you taking the time to read my post. I invite you to follow along with me in this Steemit journey, I have several law enforcement related stories I want to share with you! @bluelightbandit
As someone who just turned 20, I think this debate is really salient to me. It seems strange that we don't standardize on one age of majority like you said about the army vs private ownership. As it stands, you cannot buy a pistol until 21 so to me that reads "you can defend yourself at home with a long gun, but even if you want to do so legally, you can shove your ideas about defending yourself in public right up your ass". In other words, you are an adult at 18, but aren't trusted with the right of self defense until 21 is what this debate sounds like to me and that is an incredibly backwards idea.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
I understand where you're coming from and thats why I brought up the examples of changing with times.
There's definitely questions about the age laws and restrictions in the United States because you are considered an adult at age 18 but you can't buy alcohol and you can't buy a handgun. Part of the reasoning for that is because an 18 year old persons brain has not fully developed yet. The jury is still out on when a human brain has fully developed but it is thought to be in their twenties. This makes sense why the alcohol law is at 21 but it doesn't explain why you still have two different ages for weapons. I still believe this is because we haven't changed with the times. The whole reason this topic is even being brought up is because of the fact that teens are legally aquiring these guns and are committing mass murderers with them. We're not seeing an epidemic where teenagers are getting beat down or severely assaulted on the streets and they don't have any means to defend themselves.
Let me ask you this... What's your thoughts on letting an 18 year old become a police officer? There's good reasons for the minimum age being 21.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I mean I completely understand the reasons for the 21 vs 18 situation from a cognitive perspective. I don't exactly think that that is why the laws for 18 are the way they are. It is not as much about overall cognitive development and intelligence than it is about recognizing cause/effect and being able to think rationally about consequences. If it were about intelligence, then there would be IQ restrictions on the exercising of certain rights. Once someone has passed 18 there is basically no chance that they haven't passed the cause/effect milestone (discounting the mentally handicapped).
By in large, the majority of gun murderers are adults. While it is easy to point to school shootings and think there is a problem with youths and guns, school shooting are statistically an anomaly when compared to overall violent crime with guns or gun homicides. That being said, late teens and young adults are more commonly the victims of crime so as far as an epidemic of teens being victimized by violent crime, there is an arguement to be made for such a thing. Generally speaking though, gang affiliations and poverty have a lot to do with it as a confounding factor.
As far as the police thing goes, I have personally no problem with the idea of an 18 year old being a cop. Problems with authority aside, if they can test as well or better than someone 21+ I would rather have them as cops than the other guys. This is coming from me who would hate 18 year old me.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Who knows exactly why the law makers did what they did? I can't speak for them, all I can do is speculate.
I'm not a neurologist either so I really don't know specific details about what percentages of what areas of the brain are still undeveloped until you're in your 20's. I just remember Dr. Oz talking about it and I figure he knows what he's talking about lol.
Obviously adults commit more murders than teenagers do. But that's veering away from the topic at hand which is teenagers legally buying AR-15's and doing these mass shootings with them.
I'm not sure where you got your statistics for making the statement about late teens and young adults being more commonly the victims of crime but I would have to strongly disagree with that. In over 12 years of working in law enforcement, at least 95% of my victims were over 21. I know, thats just me in my little section of the world and its different everywhere else. But this is a subject that is also veering away, or at least has the potential. First you would have to be more specific with how old a "young adult" is. Then you would need to decide what kind of crimes you want associated with your victims to attempt to get an accurate statistic. Which getting an accurate statistic is somewhat of a mystery anyway. But for shits and giggles, I located these murder statistics really quick. It shows 996 victims of murder between the ages of 17 and 19. From the ages of 20 and 24 it jumps to 2,431 and from 25 to 29 it's 2,071.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/251878/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-age/
As far as juveniles being victims of crimes that constitute the use of deadly force, I think the number would be pretty low. Sure, kids get beat up every day during fist fights but that doesn't necessarily constitute the use of deadly force. Getting jumped by a "gang", now that's a different story.
I know you have problems with authority, I've seen your previous postings and video. I still respect your opinion even though I disagree with you. An 18 year old is definitely able to complete a police exam as well as the physical test. But there's no way in hell I would assume the liability of swearing in an 18 year old. You're talking about giving a tremendous amount of responsibility to someone that has had their driver's license for only 2 years. Hell, I think 21 is actually boarderline for becoming a cop. I was extremely mature and responsible when I started my career in my 20's and I still did stupid and immature stuff while on duty. There's no way in hell I could have done my job when I was 18.
I appreciate the civilized dialogue and it's obvious we both have our own seperate opinions about things. But do me a favor, please. I didn't comment on the video you posted the other day but I had several reservations with some things you said in the video. I really don't want to address everything and debate about it. But if you don't mind, I would greatly appreciate it if you would read an article that I wrote. I'm not asking you to upvote it or comment on it. I just want you to read it in hopes that it might get a wheel or two turning in your young mind. Many thanks for your time.
https://steemit.com/parklandschoolshooting/@bluelightbandit/not-all-cops-should-be-cops
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, that's what I have heard for the age of consent and why it is 16, so I figured it would make some element of sense to apply that here as well, but I can only guess.
I understand your statement that teens are buying guns with greater capacity for death then they could really have in recent generations, but I still think it would be valuable to look at overall stats which I know is hard for me personally. It is much easier to focus down, but pulling back mass shootings like Parkland are so unlikely like I said that I am not convinced that prohibiting these guns from being bought by teens would outweigh the possible good they could have in terms of defense, hunting, or what have you. By the same token however, we can't just pretend the problem doesn't exist by stating that it is unlikely. Children used to be able to go to hardware stores and buy thompsons and we didn't see this kind of destructive intent and it would be desirable to get to the bottom of it as soon as possible. I think that psychological abnormalities are probably playing a large role in that, but who knows.
As far as young adults, I saw that the biggest was in the 17-24 range for homicides, I will try to dig that up again. I classed those as young adults and for 2 of those years hypothetically under new rules, people would be legally unable to defend themselves with guns. Perhaps my perception of teen victimization is heightened because I grew up outside NYC and now live in Baltimore. Neither are particularly gang free zones.
I also have no idea what it is like to be a police officer or any of that, so I will defer to your on the clock experience about 18 year olds. Do you think there is a difference between the "bump in the night, better grab my gun" scenario and the more complex situations an officer might see on duty? To me the first one should be easier to comprehend for someone who is much younger.
Sure thing man, I really appreciate this conversation. I think you express yourself really well and it all makes sense, though I will not necessarily agree with everything you say. This is a rough exam week so I will not get time to read your article tonight most likely, but I am leaving that tab open for tomorrow. I absolutely will upvote and comment. Hell, if I dig it it'll get a resteem. No worries at all, and thank you for your time!
Catch you later
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm not exactly positive what you mean by the bump in the night vs. the officer on duty question? I've definitely had things go bump in the night at my house where I've had to jump out of bed and go into combat mode and tactfully address the situation but there's no way to compare that with the so many different situations that I faced while being an officer. I mean during those 12 years, I have experienced so many situations where weapons were involved, either by myself or by a suspect or both. I was also on the SWAT team so I got extra tactical exposure there as well. But there was just so many different scenarios that you just can't fully train for. Everything from searching a house for a suspect to searching the woods at night time for a suspect to doing a vehicle assault, each one is different in their own right and even if you've done house searches, they will still be totally different due to the person you're hunting in the house and various other elements. I mean you can train all you want but I can promise you it will be much different in real life. That was one of the things that I absolutely loved about my job was that you never knew what to expect and it was always something new and exciting and I was kind of an adrenaline junkie. It didn't phase me to go in to dangerous situations alone and I actually welcomed it..."most of the time". I hope that answered your question, if not, let me know and I will try again.
Good luck with your exam!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I wrote a comment on Kokesh, you might find interesting. Check my post again.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm in the no more new laws boat. I don't think new laws like raising the buying age will stop any teen hell bent on killing people. Guns are easy to buy on the street, if there is a will there is a way. I do not for one second believe that more laws will create less violence. I also do not think all this pushing of new gun laws is to help the children. Did you know that on average 11 teens die everyday from texting and driving? Where is the outrage? No, this is not about saving children but about control in my opinion. I firmly believe that the second amendment shall not be infringed.
Thanks for bringing up this topic, this is a good one for discussion.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I appreciate and respect your opinion and I agree that someone, no matter the age, that is hell bent on committing a crime will do whatever it takes to accomplish that goal. But I find it hard to believe that changing the law to buy a rifle to 21 or having some type of co-signer wouldn't at least prevent or deter one person thats on the brink of committing such an act from actually doing it. Notice I said on the brink and not hell bent.
Your comment about texting is similar to the point I made in an article I wrote a couple of weeks ago....
"Approximately every 2 minutes someone is injured in the United States in an alcohol related car crash.
Every day, almost 29 people in the U.S. die in alcohol related crashes. That's one person every 50 minutes; according to NHTSA in 2016
Also according to NHTSA statistics. In 2010, the most recent year for which cost data is available, these deaths and damages contributed to a cost of 44 BILLION dollars per year!"
"Those alcohol related crash statistics are overwhelming, don't you think? But yet I don't see people on the news lobbying for alcohol control, car control or anything else related. Why is that? Is it because money and politics is more associated with guns?"
So yeah, I get that there's people dying from more things than guns that you don't hear about every day. And yes, there are politicians that want to see total control and every gun taken off of every citizen. But I don't think that changing the age restriction to buy certain weapons is all about control, I think it's just adapting with the times.
How many people died from texting drivers before they made it against the law to text while driving?
Same thing here man. How many more school shootings or mass shootings in general is society going to put up with before a change is made? As I said in my post, I don't want to see new laws or weapon restrictions either but it seems like the age limit change is the most reasonable and sensible thing to amend. But if we don't "try" to at least do something to fix the problem and the shootings just keep getting worse, I got a feeling that our next administration will be much more assertive on actual gun control instead of just amending an existing law. Just my 0.02
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have to agree with you. I would love the idea to be executed because the recent happenings in the US are just too much.There hasn't been as many shootings in any country as in the US. Someone to vouch in order to be able to buy a gun should not be too big of a problem and it clearly has many advantages.
Thank you for contributing to the Steemit Community.Keep up the great work and I'm looking forward to your next posts.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
THANK YOU! That was my whole point!
"Someone to vouch in order to be able to buy a gun should not be too big of a problem and it clearly has many advantages."
It seems like instead of just doing nothing but waiting for the next one to happen, this could be a reasonable step that wouldn't cost the taxpayers an arm and a leg or infringe on the 2nd Amendment.
Thank you for your response!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I mean I get that people have to defend themselves in someway in case there is a robbery or something similar so getting someone to vouch for you makes no problems at all.The freedom is too big atm and the gun is not something we can play with. Being 18 doesn't have to mean we are adults in our minds. I really want a proper training for people as well since that would stop many unwanted situations.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I honestly don't think gun control is going to solve the problem. Anything can be used and will be used as a weapon in the wrong hands. Most of the mass shootings we are witnessing are coming from people with a severe form of mental illness. They want to commit suicide by cop (sorry) because it is cowardly and they can go out in a blaze of glory. They feel worthless and unimportant. This is one way to get recognition, to get 15 minutes of fame. Perhaps we need to look at where the problem originates instead of slapping a band aid on it. Okay, now I'm off my soap box.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm not for "gun control" either and agree the underlying problem is the real issue but I really think my age amendment idea would be positive step in the right direction without infringing on our rights.
I don't know if Walmart and Dicks Sporting Goods read my article or not but ironically, they changed their store policy to no sales under 21 today.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It would be nice to think that they read your article and that you are being heard! Age restrictions help in some instances, but both you and I know that there are folks over age restrictions that shouldn't even be allowed to cross the street by themselves, or drive a car or be allowed to buy alcohol...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
And there's a bunch out there that shouldn't even be allowed to breed!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
A whole bunch of new gun laws passed in my state yesterday I think. The age to buy a rifle passed which I can't say bothered me that much. They tried to pass magazine restriction to 10 rounds too! Luckily that failed. Even if we're talking handguns my 9mm holds 17+1
They also out right banned bump fire and cranks...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That doesn't sound bad, I'm glad the magazine ban failed! I don't care about the bump stock anyway. I saw where other states were trying to ban high cap mags but they were getting turned down thankfully. I don't wanna brag or anything but my 9mm holds 50+1 😁!
Thanks brother!
20170909_185109.jpg
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I grabbed a couple of the 30+ ones been thinking about grabbing the drum just because. Did I mention I don't even have a glock...yet lol
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
WHAT?! What are you waiting for? I love me some Glocks now. I got 7 of them and still want some more lol.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm thinking a 19 or 26 because it would be a ccw. I have a big hand though so maybe more towards 19.
When I bought my 9 I wanted all steel! I wasn't sold on polymer at that point. This thing is big and heavy though.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have huge hands and my edc is a 26. I also have a 19 and 17 btw but I like carrying the 26, even without the mag extension.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well.....I see you're just writing about super simple subjects. LOL
So much can be gone through and it's almost dinner, but a few thoughts.
I hear what you're saying, but I think a much greater thing affecting this, a "change of the times" is not the weapons, but the attitude or level of maturity of youth today. I know this kind of follows the old joke about suddenly sounding like your father, but it's what I've seen.
The gun issues happening today, didn't happen the same way 20 years ago. But to disagree with you, ALL these types of weapons existed. The AR-15 is almost 60 years old, AK-47 well you know what the 47 is. Perhaps not as prevalent in 1968 when the 18 yr old requirement was put into effect....but Colt was selling the AR-15 "sporter" at that time and had been for an undetermined number of years prior to 68.
So throughout the preceding years, the weapon and it's "types" were readily available. My first was a Mini 14. Yet at some point things changed....and it wasn't the firearms or their availability that changed. One can debate a multitude of things that may have.
HOWEVER.....it also is a fact that things have changed. Perhaps another possibility is not changing the age, but the requirements for that age. You pointed out the training of kids joining the military....perhaps adding required training and testing, both written and practical. Military service being taken into account.
I don't know how effective having a "cosigner" would be in stopping anything. Parents that disagree with the law would simply sign for their 18 yr old without necessarily making them learn anything about the weapon.
Much to think on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Ahhhh, come on man, give me a little more credit than that. I know there were semi-auto's back then. When I said we didn't have weapons like these back then, I was referring to modernized M4 variants with 16" barrels or less and all of the other compact military style weapons with extremely high capacity magazines or drums.
I bet that Mini 14 was a huge step up from the flint lock you were issued in the military, wasn't it? ;)
You mentioned the attitude and maturity level has changed and that could be a factor. That's all the more reason for a co-signer. You mentioned training and testing. Just imagine how much it would cost to implement that. And what good would training do for someone wanting to go shoot up a school, be more efficient at it?
It's okay to disagree but I honestly think that having someone sign a document saying that the buyer of that weapon is believed to be of sound mind would make people really think before signing that paper for someone, even if they wern't exactly law abiding citizens. Sure, it wouldn't solve the problem totally but what if it stopped just ONE shooting from happening? Wouldn't it be worth it? It didn't infringe on anyones rights and it didn't cost a shit load in tax dollars to implement.
The gun is not the problem. I don't want to see anymore gun control laws being passed to where it's going to make it more complicated for me to make a purchase. I don't want to see military style weapons banned. I don't want to see high capacity mags banned. But if we don't at least try a little something to slow down the rate of mass shootings, then that is what is going to happen! Might as well put Bill Clinton back in office and let the banning begin.
But this was just an idea I had that I thought would possibly prevent a troubled teen from rushing out and making a big mistake. Thanks for your input.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You have received an upvote from STAX. Thanks for being a member of the #steemsilvergold community and opting in (if you wish to be removed please follow the link). Please continue to support each other in this great community. To learn more about the #steemsilvergold community and STAX, check this out.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
As a conservative Canadian, I wrote a post on control, you might find interesting.
https://steemit.com/business/@remotediscovery/where-i-stand-on-gun-control-a-canadians-perspective
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit