expvideo
Regular Member
imported post
No wonder. I felt the same way when I was 18.
No wonder. I felt the same way when I was 18.
I think there's a good reason for 18 being the right age. Children under 18 haven't fully developed, and may be more apt to make poor decisions based solely on emotion.
That and you are legally responsible for your own actions at 18. If you aren't legally responsible for your actions, I would think it wouldn't be right to carry a firearm.
Bear in mind that I am only talking about CC/OC of a pistol in public. On your own land, or while outdoors, I don't see any reason that anyone but the parent should decide when a child is old enough to carry and use a gun. I do, however, disagree with allowing children under 18 to carry guns at school. I think teachers and anyone over 18 should be allowed to be armed, but I don't think it's ok to let your 10 year old pack his glock to class. 10 year olds tend to over-react and get in fights. They tend to bully or (even worse in a gun situation) be bullied. They may not have a fully adult grasp on what the appropriate response to bullying is. Shooting isn't it. Threatening to shoot isn't either. Most people under 18 aren't fully aware of the laws either, and couldn't be held responsible if they broke any gun laws. Not that I support any gun laws per say, but I do support the enforcement oflaw in general.
That being said, I think that it is the parent's decision when a child gets to own a gun or use a gun, but as for carrying a gun, that effects society, so I don't know about parents making that call. Maybe 16-17 would be a good thing to test and see if it works, but I would absolutely support 18 yo carry.
I admitI am young and unexperienced.
Expvideo, just curious, what was the first most retarded thing you had ever heard?
The one difference between a pilots license and carrying a gun is you have to earn your license as you stated. I don't think the FAA would think to kindly of letting anyone fly a plane or glider without some kind of training. Same way with driving a car. Lots of people with a drivers license shouldn't drive them and lots of people who carry a gun shouldn't. I had my drivers license at 14 and my father was legally drivingback and forth to school atage 6. Does that mean we should let anyone drive a car at any age?
This is a fine suggestion except that many are against requiring any kind of training requirement or permit for anyone. Your points are all valid but do you agree with allowing any 12 year-old to walk into a store alone, purchase a gun and walkdown the streetwith it on his side?If this is the case, why not allow the young folks to carry provided they've been trained?
It's crap like this that turns me off of this forum.PT111 wrote:The one difference between a pilots license and carrying a gun is you have to earn your license as you stated. I don't think the FAA would think to kindly of letting anyone fly a plane or glider without some kind of training. Same way with driving a car. Lots of people with a drivers license shouldn't drive them and lots of people who carry a gun shouldn't. I had my drivers license at 14 and my father was legally drivingback and forth to school atage 6. Does that mean we should let anyone drive a car at any age?
IIRC, you can start unting alone at 12 or 14 (don't remember.)
If this is the case, why not allow the young folks to carry provided they've been trained? Should a 16 year old working part time at a convenience store be denied the right to self defence any more than an adult? To be honest, the arguments about how we shouldn't let anyone under the age of X carry a gun sounds just like the arguments of the antis. Sure, young people make mistakes, but I really don't think that's limited to young people. What's more dangerous? a 16 year old with with a pistol in the console of their car or a 40 year old wife beater with a BAC of .18 and a gun? Which is more screwed up - a 30 year old woman that gets beaten half to death and raped because she declined her husband's offer to teach her how to shoot and help her get her permit, or a law abiding 17 year old girl who is beaten and raped because the law wouldn't allow her to buy a gun, and she could have faced criminal prosecution for carrying it if she had one? We always say that "well so and so wouldn't have been mugged/beaten/raped/killed if he/she had a gun!" It's just as equally as screwed up when that person is denied that right by law. And to be honest - I think this goes for felons, too. Look - if they're that f***ed up, they shouldn't be on the street anyway. But with damn near everything being a felony now, you're life is pretty much over unless you spend time money and effort in order to get your rights back. What ever happened to "paying your debt to society"?
If guns are "the great equalizer," it's pretty screwed up that we get to pick and choose who's equal.
Actually, I'm not going to sit here and argue that the sky is blue, just because someone else has different principles. 12 year olds are not responsible enough to be carrying guns. This is not something that is debatable in my POV. Saying that it is a constitutional right for them to carry is just proposterous, and as I said before, it really turns me off of this forum, and paints us all as whack-jobs. So no, I won't make my case, I'll just be a dick and tell you that you're all crazy, because there is no sense in trying to reason with lunacy.It reads like a principled argument to me, much preferable to the personal privilege anecdotes so common here. The 2A says "shall not be infringed" and petty tyrant wannabes are tolerated as they pontificate on 'ifs', 'buts' and 'whereas.'
Make your case from first principles rather than in thoughtless gutter tongue.
Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMA$$
The one problem with the parental permission exclusion is that is there any parent that is going to say that their child didn't have permission if they get caught with a gun. Right now every time asomeone gets caught shooting someone their mother is on TV saying that thier child could not have done that and they have the wrong person.
Principle went out the door when you tried to mask anarchism as constitutionalism.So much for your principled argument. Pffft
Actually, I'm not going to sit here and argue that the sky is blue, just because someone else has different principles. 12 year olds are not responsible enough to be carrying guns. This is not something that is debatable in my POV. Saying that it is a constitutional right for them to carry is just proposterous, and as I said before, it really turns me off of this forum, and paints us all as whack-jobs. So no, I won't make my case, I'll just be a dick and tell you that you're all crazy, because there is no sense in trying to reason with lunacy.