Your grandson has broken the law, because the legal age for handgun ownership is
21.If your grandson did in fact buy a handgun, then he did not do it
with a criminal background check, which is precisely what we're talking
about with the proposed law to require all firearms sales to involve such
His has to be the most ridiculous pro-gun argument ever. You really think it is
Obama spreading the fear? Have you checked out AM radio recently? The amount
of frothing and foaming from the gun lobby is over the top. Most
Americans favor reasonable gun legislation and no "jack booted thugs"
will be by to confiscate anyones firearms.
If there is fear, it wasn't Obama that put it out there. It's the NRA
gun nuts that put out the proposition that the only real deterant for a "bad
guy" with a gun is a "good guy" with a gun. Why would they say
that? Could it be that they want to sell more guns? The message from Obama and
others, is that assault wseapons are inherently "dangerous and unusual"
(Scalia in Heller) But this letter writer just wants to blame the messenger. It
is a classic example of blame transference.
Those kids must be hearing someone fanatically rage against the government and
encouraged to get gun crazy too.
I see. It's President Obama's fault that his proposal to limit assault
rifles and high capacity magazines caused your grandson to make an irrational
and unintelligent decision to buy a handgun and taser when he has no need for
either. I'd say his decision is more likely influenced by parenting than
the President. So much for conservatives believing in personal responsibility,
Oh, yes, it's the president's fault!
Is the problem the proposed gun restrictions, or should we be looking at the
irrational way people are reacting?
You probably didn't expect it but your letter is thee perfect reason why we
need to adopt the President's reforms.
Perhaps your grandson needs a wise parent or grandparent to counsel him against
making irrational fear-based purchases. It's too bad if there is not one
available (doing the job) because 18 year-olds, if left to their own devices,
can make regrettable decisions
If it is true, it seems ironic that an 18 year old can be in the military,
issued a military style assault weapon to defend his country, be subjected to
the ugliness of war, and be expected to be an adult through it all, but he
cannot legally own a handgun.See how unreasonable gun laws get?
@Christian 24-7: "It seems ironic that an 18 year old can be in the
military, issued a military style assault weapon to defend his country, be
subjected to the ugliness of war, and be expected to be an adult through it all,
but he cannot legally hold a beer in his hand."See how
unreasonable moral laws get?I'm sure you would argue that
"Regulation" in this case is a reasonable thing though?
I've thought the same thing. A right on paper, but not in the hearts of
people isn't very likely to survive attack. Less Americans hunt now than
in decades past and this as been a concern to people who believe in the 2nd
Ammendment. Now it seems many Americans choose to have guns, not for hunting
but for personal defense and defense of their homes and families.President Obama's attack on gun rights is causing many people who have
been marginally pro gun to actually go out and buy one. If we survive this, this
will have been a blessing in disguise.
There's an old saying...The nuts don't fall very far from
Christian 24-7Murray, UTIf it is true, it seems ironic that an 18
year old can be in the military, issued a military style assault weapon to
defend his country, be subjected to the ugliness of war, and be expected to be
an adult through it all, but he cannot legally own a handgun.See how
unreasonable gun laws get?11:57 a.m. Jan. 20, 2013===============That was the reason for the 26th ammendment.18-21 year olds could fight and die, but couldn't vote.At the
time, we still had a mandatory enlistment, and draft.Are you
proposing a mandatory military enlistment and draft -- [like Switzerland
and Israel -- the examples you gun proponents keep using?]
Read the Constitution. Obama blatently has usurped authority. "Shall not
be infringed" does not include an age limit. That age was left up to the
parents because, as the Court has told us, all levels of government are subject
to the 2nd Amendment.What a concept, that parents have the
responsibility to raise their children, to teach their children, and to prepare
their children to become adults. Part of that preparation might include keeping
and bearing arms. Who is the President to think that he has
authority to throw out a guaranteed right that the people have put into the
Constitution and that 75% of the States ratified as being binding on the
government? There is no Consitutional amendment that specifies the
age required for gun ownership; therefore, there can be no age requirement from
government. We allow an 18 year old to vote. We concider an 18
year old to be an adult. Why then would some people tell us that 18 year olds
are too young to be responsible with firearms?
"California, which has a 15-day waiting period that I supported and signed
into law while Governor, stopped nearly 1,800 prohibited handgun sales in
1989."Oh Mr Reagan. Why do you hate freedom? Why do you
disregard the constitution?Why did you support the Brady Bill? Don't
you love America?
I don't believe the letter in the first place but if it were true then you
Sir are as irrational as a person can be. You notice women are not
rushing out in droves to buy guns?
@ Christian 24-7: 18 year olds cannot drink alcohol. Do you also think that
should be changed?
@j thomas except the age limit was set long before Obama and has nothing
to do with him, but since we are discussing allowing parent to raise their own
children does that mean you will drop your push to impose your religious views
on what movies my child sees, what games they play, what books they read, stay
out of their bedroom and mine, on and on?
A lot of you have tried to put words in my mouth. I merely pointed
out the irony of giving an 18 year old an assault weapon, which many in society
want banned, while denying the same 18 year old the right to own a handgun,
which is otherwise legal in society.I don't think we should
send children to fight our wars, so the age of adulthood should be the minimum
age of military combat service. Is that 18, or 21, or something else? I
won't say, but I think adulthood age should be consistent.I
have said nothing of alcohol, until now. I will say just this, and no more.I believe that guns and alcohol should never be used together. Like
drinking and driving, they are a deadly mix.Screwdriver - "You
notice women are not rushing out in droves to buy guns?" Actually I
have noticed the opposite.
Adverse effects?What?40 elementary students are going to
be gunned down by assault rifles instead of 20?Fear tactics serve no
one.Just ask our dead troops in Iraq.
PaganSalt Lake City, UTAgreed.Great comment!BTW - Welcome back.You've been missed my friend.
Pagan"40 elementary students are going to be gunned down by
assault rifles instead of 20?Fear tactics serve no one."Since this is a classic example of fear tactics, I find the whole
statement hypocritical.Fear tactics are used because they serve one
groups agenda, just as your fear tactics serve your agenda.
Tolstoy,Your post to J Thompson should be answered by everyone who
loves America.Obama is the President. Yesterday (Sunday) he swore
an oath to uphold the Constitution. Today (Monday) he repeated that ceremony in
public for all to see. That oath requires that he set "right" all
Constitutional wrongs committed by himself or by other Presidents who signed
unconstitutional bills into law. He is totally and unilaterally responsible to
see that nothing done by the Federal Government violates the enumerated duties
assigned to that level of government by the people via the Constitution.He will not do his duty. He mocks the Constitution with his policies
and the laws that he signs. He mocks us by refusing to discharge the duties of
his office.No one from the LDS Church's leadership sits on the
MPAA board. According to their website, parents sit on that board to rate
movies. As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I
sustain my leaders and abide by their council to not watch R rated movies and to
use judgement on everything that I do. Prophets speak for God. Are
you listening to them?
20 dead children are not a fear tactic.It is an unfortunate reality.
Columbine had armed security.Ft. Hood had an armed
response. Gabriel Giffords had armed security and I believe three
armed men around her when she was shot in the head.Result? More dead
Americans.Don't misundersand, I am not using fear to create
havok.I am using facts to help people realize. That they should be
concerned that this is the reality we face.And help protect, lives.
LDS Liberal.Why thank you!I am always amazed anyone even
remembers me and my rants. lol.Sorry I have been away. I have been busy getting Obama re-elected.And today, you can see
on the news was his second inauguration. We, can make a
difference.We, can make the world better for our friends and our
children.Yes we can.
I remember too Pagan, welcome back. The conservatives are already a minority on
their own newspaper but every bit of reason helps.
@mike So since Obama is suppose to remove these unreasonable limits set by
our government on age restrictions then you will surely not complain about his
removing such restrictions on drinking age and children seeking abortions right
and of course you supported his decision to try to repeal DOMA since he felt it