[Kauboy]

Like the rest of you, I've been reading and engaging with others on the aftermath of the latest school shooting.
While reading about the details of the case, as they are currently known, I read about how this person acquired the rifle used in the shooting.
This person passed the background check and bought the rifle legally. He then went on to commit numerous acts of cowardly murder.
The response has been overwhelming, as expected.
But one thing did jump out at me.
Anti-gun activists and proponents often cite that the age to buy a rifle is 18 years old, while the age to buy a handgun is 21. These are federal restrictions imposed under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Since most of the shooters who employ a rifle are under the age of 21, maybe we should bump the age.
So it struck me that we should consider raising the age of buy a rifle to 21.
But that caused an internal conflict. "If they are old enough to be sent to war to die for their country, they're old enough to do all the other things an adult can do."

That's when I had the idea to raise the legal age of adulthood itself. It's not a new idea, but maybe one we should start pushing harder for.
Think of the ramifications of raising the legally recognized age of adulthood to 21.
Cigarettes, military service, rifles, and even voting.... all would be impacted by this, and maybe for the better.
Knowing I'm prone to "blind spots", I wanted to start a discussion to get feedback and hear concerns.

Obviously this would have a detrimental effect on our military recruiting efforts. Perhaps active military service would pre-empt this "adulthood" restriction, allowing any active duty 18+ individual to enjoy full adult status. I dunno, that might be impractical. Just brainstorming.

I know I'd welcome the effect this would have on voting.
High school kids voting based on which politician can promise them the biggest reward seems like a bad way to choose leaders.
Let them see more of the real world first. Their voting patterns would likely change.

It doesn't violate due process rights, as red-flag laws would. (I can't believe I used to think those were a good idea, and not ripe for abuse)
It doesn't violate current law that restricts gun registration, as any "universal background check" system would require.
It doesn't violate a person's constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, which SCOTUS has ruled encompasses "all bearable arms" and those in "common use". (two different cases)
It could have a temporary limitation where current 18-20 year olds, as of some date, would retain their adult status.

Nobody looses any rights, and we further restrict immature children from participating in objectively dangerous activities.
Thoughts?

 

[Maine-Marine]

In some areas a military person is legal to drink under 18 (if they can drive to a place that allows 18 year olds to drink

I was 15 when I bought my first rifle at a western auto.

making the age 19,20, or 21 is not going to stop this...

first we have to understand it is not a gun problem.. it is a person problem

You could however say 21 to buy a rifle UNLESS you have honorable military service

better question WHAT LAW WOULD HAVE STOPPED ANY OF THESE SHOOTINGS

 

[Maine-Marine]

oh, and I think voting should be restricted to tax payers over the age of 25

 

[Kauboy]

better question WHAT LAW WOULD HAVE STOPPED ANY OF THESE SHOOTINGS

Believe me, I'm not trying to sidestep this important question.
But the specific cases we've seen in the last three weeks would have been prevented by restricting rifle purchases to older buyers. (assuming the legal purchase was their only known option)
The Buffalo shooter and the Uvalde shooter were both 18 and bought their rifles legally after passing background checks, as neither had any previous felonies. The Buffalo shooter even passed a mental health assessment.
Clearly background checks are not working as intended, and mental health assessments are far too subjective, but anti-gun folks think more of the same will make a difference.

But if the age hard cap was increased by raising the age of adulthood, it would prevent the LEGAL purchase of rifles by, let's face it, grown children.
I'm absolutely NOT saying this would stop all rifle shootings. And we know the Virginia Tech shooter used legally purchased handguns.
But it would add an additional barrier of time to the legal purchase route. It would absolutely cut down on incidents if the teenager had no knowledge of how to acquire a rifle illegally.

It's not a perfect solution by any means. But it's a legal one that doesn't infringe on rights.

 

[inceptor]

better question WHAT LAW WOULD HAVE STOPPED ANY OF THESE SHOOTINGS

And this is the heart of the matter. You can't discipline a child anymore because you can be arrested. For some things, time out in a corner is not sufficient. Growing up, a child is taught there are no serious consequences for their actions so what do you expect. This kid was a transgender, his FB posts have been shared. He was picked on, from what I've been hearing, because of this. And he had been planning this since 2018 when he and another kid wanted to reenact Columbine.

Now they want to ban rifles, at least many of them. Schumer has added an amendment for this very thing to an existing bill before Congress.

None of this existing or new laws will stop this. Guns are very restricted in Chicago. Yet they have one of the highest murder rates in the country. Rittenhouse was shot at by a convicted felon and he admitted it in court. Yet Rittenhouse was charge and no charges at all for the felon. He walked free.

No, we changed from right is right and wrong is wrong to what's wrong is right and what's right is wrong. This won't stop until that is fixed.

 

[inceptor]

But if the age hard cap was increased by raising the age of adulthood, it would prevent the LEGAL purchase of rifles by, let's face it, grown children.
I'm absolutely NOT saying this would stop all rifle shootings. And we know the Virginia Tech shooter used legally purchased handguns.
But it would add an additional barrier of time to the legal purchase route. It would absolutely cut down on incidents if the teenager had no knowledge of how to acquire a rifle illegally.

It's not a perfect solution by any means. But it's a legal one that doesn't infringe on rights.

So if that doesn't work, do we up the age to 25? Then 30?

 

[Kauboy]

So if that doesn't work, do we up the age to 25? Then 30?

What right is currently restricted to only those who've attained those ages?
None.
So no, this isn't a slippery slope scenario.
It's a consistency issue.
When a person is an "adult", they enjoy all rights. Currently, that is not the case. But making it true would have the added effect of removing a legal path for children to acquire firearms.

You are correct in that we have confused right and wrong, and lowered the value of human life. This is the true scourge of our world.
But that isn't fixed by law. It's fixed by God. Since we can't legislate God into people's lives, we have to work on the symptoms of God missing in their lives.
Bringing all legal adult activities into alignment with a higher age would help. That's what I'm proposing.

 

[Chipper]

Went in the ARMY on my 17th birthday. Why is 18 the cut off??

AGE doesn't have a darn thing with being an adult OR mentally stable. Shouldn't be a goal post or cut off.

Maybe all children should pass a general knowledge test and be signed off by 5 adults. Before getting the rights and privilege of an being considered an adult.

Not 5 adults of their peers but older adults like parents and grandparents, for example. Sure there will be cases when teachers or others will have to sign off and that would have to be addressed.

Some how age has to stop being the bench mark.

 

[CapitalKane49p]

My take.

If you are old enough to fight, die or get maimed for your country you should be old enough to purchase a firearm.

What that piece of filth did in Texas has nothing to do age limits on firearms. He was evil and if he didn't have a firearm her would have used a car, knife bomb ... to kill people.

Godspeed

 

[inceptor]

What right is currently restricted to only those who've attained those ages?
None.
So no, this isn't a slippery slope scenario.
It's a consistency issue.
When a person is an "adult", they enjoy all rights. Currently, that is not the case. But making it true would have the added effect of removing a legal path for children to acquire firearms.

You're probably too young to remember, but there was a time when there were no restrictions. A 12 yr old could walk into a store and buy any firearm he chose. Guns at schools were normal. Many schools had shooting clubs. Many of the kids went hunting after school and had a rifle in the back window of their truck.

School shootings were not common place back then. Oh, there were guns a plenty, but folks didn't use a gun to vent their frustrations. So with all your proposed rules, how would that change, and how would it affect the future? Remember, the bozos at Columbine had a number of ways with them to wreak havoc, but ended up only using the guns.

Just as an aside, I remember some fellow in China stabbing a whole classroom full of students.

Man stabs children at Chinese nursery school

25 pupils injured in knife attack in Jiangsu province, the third targeting children in just over a month

www.theguardian.com

Britian has banned even steak knives. Is this something you look forward to?

 

[Back Pack Hack]

Raising the age limit to buy a rifle won't stop someone under 21 from killing. They'll either use some other form of lethality, or simply use stolen guns.

Instead, we should be looking at WHY they are doing this. Obviously, the Texas POS can't tell us, but there's plenty of others who can.

I find it amazing that whenever there's "an event", the first newscasts always end with "...and so far, no motive has been provided...". Yet, even years later, no motive is ever offered by the MSM. That's because they don't want us to know the motives... they only want to focus on taking away our rights.

 

[Kauboy]

I feel like some of you are not actually reading what I wrote.
I specifically wrote about some of these concerns, and mentioned it won't stop all killing.
You can't stop a human bent on destruction with laws. No argument there.
This is about what age we consider people accountable and capable of exercising all of their rights, including legally owning and using ALL manner of arms.

Some how age has to stop being the bench mark.

I understand this point. But how on earth can you convince a nation to have a subjective determination about when a person can exercise their rights?
That's a big can of wormy nepotism.

If you are old enough to fight, die or get maimed for your country you should be old enough to purchase a firearm.
What that piece of filth did in Texas has nothing to do age limits on firearms. He was evil and if he didn't have a firearm her would have used a car, knife bomb ... to kill people.

I understand your underlying point. I even addressed your "die for your country" point specifically.
But he bought this gun legally, background check and all. It's "possible" that he could have used another weapon. A devious mind can conjure up all sorts of things. But he chose to buy a gun.
If the legal age of adulthood was raised to 21, he would not have been able to. Maybe that would have prevented this, and maybe he would have chosen another weapon. We don't know.
But what negative impact would raising the adult age to 21 have?

@inceptor, harkening back to the good ol' days doesn't do service to the issues of today.
There is no magic means of restoring the value of human life. There is no simple way to get kids to respect firearms again.
The rot has set in. You know this. You have already accepted that we are doomed.
So the focus shouldn't be on "oh how times have changed", but rather "how do we change with the times".
I never said I wanted any kind of ban. Strawman arguments should be left out.
The idea revolves entirely around a legal means to adhere to the constitution and still make it harder for children to use weapons.

We have 18 year olds still in high school. We have legal adults still fraternizing with legal minors.
Why on earth do we have that?
It may not have been true 50 years ago, but it's true now... 18 year olds are children, not adults.

If anyone can give me a coherent argument for why we shouldn't drop the age of adulthood down to 15 that doesn't completely support my reason for raising it to 21, I'd love to hear it.

 

[Kauboy]

I find it amazing that whenever there's "an event", the first newscasts always end with "...and so far, no motive has been provided...". Yet, even years later, no motive is ever offered by the MSM. That's because they don't want us to know the motives... they only want to focus on taking away our rights.

This is an excellent point.
The answer is both simple and complicated.

Simple:
The MSM is incentivized to allow murder to happen. The bigger the better. "If it bleeds, it leads."
They don't want underlying factors to come to light. They just want it glorified so more will happen.
They're also entirely in the pocket of anti-gun groups, who are in turn in the pockets of groups seeking to undermine our nation.
Calling for restrictions is in their best interest if they wish to achieve their long term goal. Subjugation.
It's a lifelong appointment to be the dictator's talking head. They're all vying for the future position.

Complicated:
The myriad reasons for the shooters doing what they do could fill a library.
From bullying to drugs to nihilism to supremacy to just plain crazy, phycologists can build careers out of these people, but the layperson either doesn't care or is presumed to not care.
Then there's the risk of "copycat" actors who see the "manifesto" and glamor that these murderers produce, and it feeds an ego monster bigger than a Buick.
The last thing a news agency wants is to be included in the next shooter's suicide message. So they leave out the "why" 95% of the time.

 

[inceptor]

@inceptor, harkening back to the good ol' days doesn't do service to the issues of today.
There is no magic means of restoring the value of human life. There is no simple way to get kids to respect firearms again.
The rot has set in. You know this. You have already accepted that we are doomed.
So the focus shouldn't be on "oh how times have changed", but rather "how do we change with the times".
I never said I wanted any kind of ban. Strawman arguments should be left out.
The idea revolves entirely around a legal means to adhere to the constitution and still make it harder for children to use weapons.

Say what you will, but human nature usually remains consistent. Attitudes have changed. The regard for human life has changed. The need for govt's to control the people has changed. Even accountability has changed. One can blame and sue others for their own mistakes. A man's handshake was as good as a contract. Now, it means nothing, nothing at all. Lying and deceit have become the norm instead of the exception.

This is not evolution. This is a change in personal accountability and entitlement.

So your solution is to adapt to what the govt wants. They tell us God made mistakes, and they have to fix those mistakes. God said there are 2 genders, and we now know there are about 100 or so. God given rights are also a mistake. So, we need to regulate who is allowed what and when.

Move the legal age to 25. When that doesn't work, then move it to 30. When that doesn't work, then remove those "rights" all together. Remember, there are no God given rights, only gubbermint given rights.

There is no magic means of restoring the value of human life. There is no simple way to get kids to respect firearms again.

Sure there is. Start teaching morals and values again. Teach right from wrong. Stop telling people that if it feels good, do it. BTW, the motto "if it feels good, do it" is a hold-over from the 60's and 70's.

I have a sneaking suspicion that you are not teaching your kids anything like the govt teaches others kids. I suspect you teach the good ole ways.

 

[Back Pack Hack]

........
The last thing a news agency wants is to be included in the next shooter's suicide message. So they leave out the "why" 95% of the time.

The reason they leave it out is so they can do their part to push the 'take all the guns' agenda. Telling the sheeple it's not the guns that are the problem would undermine that.

 

[Kauboy]

Move the legal age to 25. When that doesn't work, then move it to 30. When that doesn't work, then remove those "rights" all together. Remember, there are no God given rights, only gubbermint given rights.

If you can find any precedent for that, please share.
To my knowledge it doesn't exist.
Like I said, it's a consistency issue. The fact that children remain children into their late teens nowadays is a symptom.

Sure there is. Start teaching morals and values again. Teach right from wrong. Stop telling people that if it feels good, do it.

Great idea!
How?
How do you affect the kids who are on this path? How do you enforce fatherhood? How do you insert "moral teaching" into public education where the vast majority of kids are?
If you mention the Bible these days, you're immediately labeled a religious bigot. If you try to tell anyone they need to fix their life, you're not allowing them to "live their truth".
I'll repeat, there is no magic means of restoring this. The system is broken. It's been broken for a very long time.
We either suffer the destruction of the system and pray to God we are the ones who rebuild it, or we face reality and work with what we have until kingdom come.
And yes, I teach my kids the morals of the New Testament and the lessons of our country's founding. But I care about my kids and how they will enter society.
Pick any shooter, or your average student in public school, and take a guess about their parental involvement. You can't legislate better parenting.

The reason they leave it out is so they can do their part to push the 'take all the guns' agenda. Telling the sheeple it's not the guns that are the problem would undermine that.

That was what I intended to convey in the following lines of the "Simple" breakout, but may have done a poor job. They are certainly on the dole with the agenda

They're also entirely in the pocket of anti-gun groups, who are in turn in the pockets of groups seeking to undermine our nation.
Calling for restrictions is in their best interest if they wish to achieve their long term goal. Subjugation.

 

[Back Pack Hack]

.....? How do you enforce fatherhood? ....

You can't.

But what you can enforce is manhood. The traditional family unit may not teach it, but it certainly can be enforced in society. We, as said society, can say, "Listen, dude... we don't put up with that shít, so you need to change your ways. If you don't do so voluntarily, we will make you..... by force, if necessary." Translation: Shape up, or rot in jail... your choice.

 

[Kauboy]

You can't.

But what you can enforce is manhood. The traditional family unit may not teach it, but it certainly can be enforced in society. We, as said society, can say, "Listen, dude... we don't put up with that shít, so you need to change your ways. If you don't do so voluntarily, we will make you..... by force, if necessary." Translation: Shape up, or rot in jail... your choice.

But can you really do that?
Everybody is looking for a windfall lawsuit. "Words are violence" now. Masculinity is "toxic".
You can still find this type of behavior in small towns here and there, the kinds of places you can still leave your doors unlocked...
But how do we really do this without first changing society? Fix society to fix society.

I suspect the only time this happens throughout history is after a major collapse or war. We saw it with Rome, France, the U.S.
I wonder what it will be for us.
My money is on the "fall of Rome" scenario.

 

[Back Pack Hack]

But can you really do that?.....

I can't, but we can. It just takes enough of us to make it happen.

 

[Kauboy]

It just takes enough of us

I'm losing faith that there are enough.