Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Nra challenges constitutionality of federal handgun ban for lac 18-20 year old

  1. #1
    Regular Member zoom6zoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,694

    Nra challenges constitutionality of federal handgun ban for lac 18-20 year old

    This would be great news for some of our younger members if it goes through (assuming they didn't forget the part about ammo purchases, too).

    http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/News....aspx?ID=14212

    Wednesday, September 08, 2010

    Fairfax, Va. -- The NRA is challenging federal laws that prohibit law-abiding Americans eighteen through twenty years of age from legally purchasing a handgun through a federally licensed firearm dealer. The case was filed Tuesday evening in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Lubbock Division. James D'Cruz of Lubbock, TX is the plaintiff in this case.

    "In Heller and McDonald, the U.S. Supreme Court clearly stated that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for all law-abiding Americans," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "That right is not limited only to Americans twenty-one years of age and older. Indeed, throughout our nation's history, adults beginning at age eighteen have served in the military and fought for this country with honor. But while the Supreme Court has consistently made clear that the federal government cannot ban or unduly restrict sales of items protected by the Constitution, the federal government continues to prohibit these adults from purchasing handguns from federally licensed dealers, which represent the largest and most accessible means of purchasing handguns."

    The suit asserts: "At eighteen years of age, law-abiding citizens in this country are considered adults for almost all purposes and certainly for the purposes of the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights. Indeed, at eighteen, citizens are eligible (and male citizens could be conscripted) to serve in the military-to fight and die by arms for the country. Yet, Section 922(b)(1) prohibits law-abiding adults in this age group from lawfully purchasing -- from the most prevalent and readily available source -- what the Supreme Court has called "the quintessential self-defense weapon" and "the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home."

    The plaintiff, Mr. D'Cruz, is well-trained in the proper handling and use of firearms, including handguns. His initial training was with his grandfather, a World War II veteran, who wanted his grandchildren to understand the proper and safe techniques for use and storage of firearms. Mr. D'Cruz received further training from his father and as a member of the Navy Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps, where he achieved the rank of Lieutenant Junior Grade. During his junior and senior years of high school, Mr. D'Cruz was a member of the JROTC's marksmanship team, and as member of that team has competed in regional and national marksmanship competitions. Mr. D'Cruz received numerous awards, including a first place medal for marksmanship, in a regional competition. Mr. D'Cruz also received a Foreign Legion unit award for marksmanship.

    The case is D'Cruz v. BATFE.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Old Enough

    [QUOTE=cabbitone;1350363]Wow[/QUOTE

    Old enough to be required to register to be called to do battle in our common defense,
    Old enough to enter into a marriage, suffer a divorce and pay alimony, or (better) raise and love a passel of kids into responsible, productive Citizens;
    Old enough to sign a mortgage or lease and be held fully responsible for that, and to be fully bound by one's words and deeds;

    Is old enough to merit the privelege of a beer at the end of a days work,

    And certainly old enough to be needful of the means to defend onself and one's family. Indeed, it is part of one's adult responsibility to do so.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585
    [QUOTE=Alexcabbie;1350482]
    Quote Originally Posted by cabbitone View Post
    Wow[/QUOTE

    Old enough to be required to register to be called to do battle in our common defense,
    Old enough to enter into a marriage, suffer a divorce and pay alimony, or (better) raise and love a passel of kids into responsible, productive Citizens;
    Old enough to sign a mortgage or lease and be held fully responsible for that, and to be fully bound by one's words and deeds;

    Is old enough to merit the privelege of a beer at the end of a days work,

    And certainly old enough to be needful of the means to defend onself and one's family. Indeed, it is part of one's adult responsibility to do so.
    +infinity

    I love the 18 year olds are not responsible enough then a photo of an Military member is shown with automatic weapons that in some case can tear buildings apart is shown.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    On my 19th birthday the US Army gave me this:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	brad-43.jpg 
Views:	250 
Size:	75.6 KB 
ID:	3978

  5. #5
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585
    Well you didn't need a concealed permit for it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    just a $200 transfer tax.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    31
    At 18 the Air Force gave me responsibility for the safety of nuclear weapons, including security of design information. But i couldn't legally buy a .22 single action revolver. Sometimes I think we live in an upside down and backwards country, then I remember it's still better than all the other ones.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    While I fully support the idea that laws abridging the RKBA based solely upon age for 18-21 yos is unconstitutional and should be struck down, I have to comment on the rhetoric involving weapons systems entrusted to 18 yos.

    In all of those cases, the person so entrusted has had a thorough background check (possibly even resulting in the award of a security clearance) and extensive training in the weapon system. He has been evaluated in his ability to safely handle and use that system.

    Again, before anyone says that I am advocating any infringement on the RKBA for the 18-21 crowd, I am not. Not even a requirement for training and a background check. I am merely pointing out the flaw in the argument.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    While I fully support the idea that laws abridging the RKBA based solely upon age for 18-21 yos is unconstitutional and should be struck down, I have to comment on the rhetoric involving weapons systems entrusted to 18 yos.

    In all of those cases, the person so entrusted has had a thorough background check (possibly even resulting in the award of a security clearance) and extensive training in the weapon system. He has been evaluated in his ability to safely handle and use that system.

    Again, before anyone says that I am advocating any infringement on the RKBA for the 18-21 crowd, I am not. Not even a requirement for training and a background check. I am merely pointing out the flaw in the argument.
    The argument is to maturity level at 18-21. The training, background checks, and certifications you refer to are really just age independent facts of being in the military. We also had short hair cuts and very shinny boots.

    I don't think that anyone is arguing that the average 18-20 year old can't mechanically handle a weapon or pass a background check. Those who are against handgun ownership and carry rights for 18-20's question their judgment.

    Driving, gunning, and commanding military weapons systems that could lay waste to a small town in a matter of minutes requires sound judgment and restraint. Being engaged in combat, peacekeeping, and enforcement operations as troops and small unit leaders demonstrates that your average young adult is quite capable of making reasonable and responsible decisions.

    There is nothing exceptional about the maturity or intelligence of people who join the military. They simply do extraordinary things to meet the challenges they face.
    Last edited by StogieC; 09-22-2010 at 04:17 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    thread resurrection.lol. does anyone know how long a case like this takes to get passed?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •