Small_Arms_Collector
Regular Member
Check out this old supreme court ruling: Wisconsin V. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) The court said in the majority opinion: "Children are 'persons' within the meaning of the Bill of Rights. We have said so over and over again."
How is that important? If children have the same rights as adults under the Bill Of Rights shouldn't that also apply to the Second Amendment?
Now consider in Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a total ban is unconstitutional.
Isn't prohibiting children under 18 from buying a gun through an FFL under the GCA a total ban? Isn't prohibiting ANYONE under 21 from owning ANTHING under the NFA a total ban?
So couldn't the GCA, and NFA then be challenged on the bases of age? Since people under 18 (or 21) are afforded the same rights under the Bill Of Rights as adults according to the Supreme Court in Yoder, than doesn't the GCA, and NFA amount to an unconstitutional total ban under Heller?
How is that important? If children have the same rights as adults under the Bill Of Rights shouldn't that also apply to the Second Amendment?
Now consider in Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a total ban is unconstitutional.
Isn't prohibiting children under 18 from buying a gun through an FFL under the GCA a total ban? Isn't prohibiting ANYONE under 21 from owning ANTHING under the NFA a total ban?
So couldn't the GCA, and NFA then be challenged on the bases of age? Since people under 18 (or 21) are afforded the same rights under the Bill Of Rights as adults according to the Supreme Court in Yoder, than doesn't the GCA, and NFA amount to an unconstitutional total ban under Heller?