What could possibly go wrong? Idiots.
This sounds very familiar. In 1938, the right-wing NSDAP lifted the ban on guns
and ammunition for those under 20 to the age of 18, contrary to the misguided
belief that the NSDAP was in favor of gun control. It is just absolutely
amazing to see history repeat itself. I just hope we don't end up the
same way as Germany.
Uncle Sam issued me an M1911 .45 when I was 20 years old. I carried it loaded
while on duty. It was idiotic that I couldn't buy my own then, and
it's still idiotic that a 20 yr old soldier can't buy his own Beretta
Its gratifying to see Utah and all these other states come out in support of gun
rights for 18 to 20 year olds. If memory serves correctly at 18 people are
allowed to join the military.A constitutional right shouldn't
be abridged just because it's convenient. If that were allowed what is the
point of having constitutional rights?
What are you people thinking? Rule of thumb: Find out the NRA position and take
the opposite. Next they will want the state to pay for everyone to have a gun.
Instead, I think they should raise the legal age to 25!
They should be allowed to buy guns at 18. They should be able to stop at the
liquor store and pick up a 6 pack of beer also. They are adults.
So Eighteen-year-olds are responsible enough for a gun... but not Alcohol????
Kings:The German Weapons Act of 1938 specifically prohibited Jews
from owning firearms at all. I'm no historian, but I'll go out on a
limb and guess that had more to do with the Holocaust than 18 year old Germans
getting a permit to buy a handgun.
I... I actually would agree with this, but in the spirit of never giving an inch
(the gun advocates' philosophy when it comes to things like background
checks that have 85% support nationwide) I hope this fails... purely out of
When will we admit that hiding behind and distorting the 2nd Amendment is an NRA
media-blitz fraud? In this very newspaper we see one article about a slain
police officer in Draper and then the next article is about how UT is working to
make sure hand guns continue to be accessible. Maybe UT should work
with the federal government to restrict frivolous gun ownership and encourage
more restrictive gun control laws.I know this is blasphemy to so
many right-wing conservatives, but remember that when James Madison wrote the
Federalist papers he wrote that virtue would be the underlying governing power
of the people. But when the people reject virtue, then there must be control.
Can we please see things as they are and admit that: yes, guns
really do kill and harm people. Gun control is not a political agenda. Rather,
it is a response to a violent people who are not governing themselves
properly.It is time to protect the innocent, see the reality of the
situation, and not be deceived by clever marketing and worn out slogans.
Those who argue that 18-21 year olds are all irresponsible and should not be
trusted with a gun ignore many facts:a- They already can buy rifles
and shotguns and we do not see that causing a problem.b- Teenage
gangbangers (including those under 18) already get all the guns they want, so we
are only talking about a law that will benefit law abiding citizens.c- Automobiles are the biggest killer of people of all ages, so should we ban
sale and use of cars by anyone under 21, instead of allowing 16 year olds to
drive?d- 18-21 year olds can vote, marry, enter into contracts, and
serve in the military. All of those require maturity, judgment and restraint.
Want to raise the ages on those?e- Thousands of Utah residents
serve(d) in the military where weapons are issued, (some even nuclear weapons!)
but if take off the uniform and they cannot have a handgun until they are 21?I applaud Utah for standing up for this common sense reform, and
supporting the principle of federalism.
It is a fact that the prefrontal cortex – the part of the brain that
controls reasoning and impulses – is not fully developed until about age
25. This is why many teenagers, especially when hormones are in high gear,
think they’re “ten feet tall and bulletproof.” Drinking,
risky sexual behaviors, and reckless driving (including texting and driving) are
more characteristic of those whose brains haven’t matured. Why in
heaven’s name should they possess guns? This has nothing do to with the
Constitution and everything to do with common sense! I taught high-school and
college students for 17 years, and I know what I’m talking about.
Milihini: Great comment!DN Subscriber 2:a- There is a problem
with that.b- The more guns sold (legally or not) the more easily they are
available to thugs.c- Apples and oranges, but yes, raising the driving age
would save lives. Restricted licenses until 18 exists in some states, and I
personally would not allow any of my freshman children to have a car at
college...and they were relatively responsible.d- Wouldn't be a bad
idea, but not possible. Statistically, many in that age range lack maturity
compared to older individuals. Car rental companies know this. Many restrict
rentals until age 25. Where is the outrage at that?e- Hopefully the
military is a growing up experience with discipline, and "issued" comes
with restrictions. I doubt that they are not "issuing" nuclear weapons
to 18 year olds. If they were, we probably would have a few being launched.
So get the state government out of the booze business and legalize marijuana.
Why do guns have special status. The whole gun lusting has gotten out of control
and become perverse.
This seems like an unnecessary change. We make our youth wait to a certain age
to do a number of adult activities. This also doesn't exclude them from
owning a rifle. I just don't understand the deep abiding need to give kids
handguns.How about if they served a mission or are enlisted in the
military service they can possess handgun below 21? That sounds fair, right?
I actually sort of support DN Subscriber 2 on some points.... (feels really)I never have understood that government thinks an 18 year old is mature
enough to sign away their life to the military, and even die for their country,
but are not responsible enough to drink, or buy weapons in civilian life. You just can't have it both ways. Either they are mature enough,
or not. If you are old enough to enlist in the military, you are old enough to
decide if you want to have a beer or not.I disagree this has
anything to do with federalism... or any other political grandstanding ploy.
This is about gaining consistency in government. This rule is as stupid as
foreign policy that sees Cuba a threat to American stability, but China earns
most favored nation trading status. The government is full of inconsistent
It would be better to change the age in induction to 21 in this country. Our
life expectancy is much greater that WW1 stats. I don't see an injustice to
voting at 18, serving in our military at 18 and not being able to catty a
concealed weapon. Perhaps we should waive the 21 year old restriction for
everyone who has been honorably discharged. I can imagine an untrained 18 year
old stopping off at the liquor store (which he can't do today) and picking
up a fifth of booze and with his concealed 45 trot off to a Rave party , a Frat
party or go to the football game . Talk about being "loaded for bear".
Instead of lowering the age at which someone may purchase a gun, how about
raising it?To something like 95?
This is John Swallows "Wag the Dog" maneuver to distract the public from
the ongoing investigations into his conduct and possible violations of state and
Guns is neat and if ma 13 year old wants won he can git won.
We're incredibly inconsistent when it comes to age restrictions on
anything. An 18 year old can vote and serve in the military, but can't
drink. A 17 year old can consent to having sex with partners in an age group
close to their own, but cannot consent to being photographed nude by them. A 13
year old cannot consent to sex because of immaturity and lack of good judgment
at that age, but can be prosecuted as an adult if charged with a felony. We
really need to be more consistent when we decide whether kids and young adults
are mature enough to be treated as adults or if they're just too young for
such decisions on their own. Back on topic, what could possibly go
wrong with 18 year olds wandering the streets with pistols? It's not as if
they ever get into fights at that age...
Oh Wonderful! Just when I think Utah cannot come up with something as inane as
gun purchases and ownership for teenagers, they propose to do just that! Of
course, wearing a gun to college classes, football games and college parties
will surely follow. What has happened to common sense in our great state? Why do
we not hear from parents or the church about this dangerous new potential law?
Oops, I forgot this is a "red" state.
How often when a crime is reported by anyone under 21 are we subjected to hours
of rationalizing that the brain of people in this age group are not yet fully
developed and cannot fully recognize the impact of their behaviour and now we
want to remove an impediment to their owning a handgun because why? Instead,
why not have the NRA join with states to push a psychological exam for all new
potential handgun owners? I believe in the right to bear arms, but where is the
voice of reason here? Where do we draw a line? You could just as easily say if
a child can make a decision at 8 to be baptized, a decision that will set the
course of his future religious life, why not also let him have a gun? Come on
folks where is the common sense?
If a person isn't old enough to decide if they want to drink then they sure
aren't old enough to have a handgun.
@Malihini Exactly how are 'we' hiding behind and
distorting the 2nd amendment?Wasn't it to guarantee our
rights?The 2nd amendment is quite clear:"...the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall NOT be INFRRINGED."Aren't you hiding behind the 1st amendment in making your
comment?Just no logic or understanding of the constitution by left.
This is an issue on which I have very little sympathy with the apparent majority
opinion in Utah. The damage done by guns in this country vastly, vastly
outweighs the benefits. I have done a fair bit of research into the statistics
on this, and they paint a picture worse than what I even expected. I feel that
our unreasonableness on guns puts a smirch on our positions on other issues,
which may be more right-headed.
If an 18 to 20 year old is mature enough to fight and possibly die defending our
freedoms in the military, he is certainly old enough to own a handgun. They can
already own a rifle or a shotgun. The currant law only discriminates against
law-biding citizens. The criminal element already ignores the law. That's
what makes them criminals.
Hmmm, Book of Mormon or hand gun? Book of Mormon or hand gun? What should an 18
year old carry?
.Let me get this straight.You can't buy alcohol until
you're 21, but your brain is well-formed enough to own and carry a loaded
weapon?Can anyone explain the logic behind this?Heck,
let's drop the drinking age to whatever the gun-buyin' age is, and
stand back and watch. Or duck..
Under 21... not responsible enough to have a beer, but totally responsible
enough to have a handgun. Right, then.
Once again, people think Super Nanny has to be there to make sure we're all
safe and well all of the time. After all, they've done such a marvelous
job with stopping the violence and deaths in places like Chicago and
Massachusetts with tougher laws--and they've proven themselves capable in
ALL phases of life management . . . or else maybe we'd have a nearly
$17,000,000,000,000 official immediate Federal debt in this country by now.
Yeah, we just need all these laws to make sure we're all behaving well,
doing everything we're supposed to do, and not doing all the things
we're not supposed to do. Politicians, bureaucrats, and central planners
always have the right answers for us, if we'd only learn to obey.
I've known a lot of "squirrelly" 18 year olds that I would never
trust to be mature and responsible gun owners. Not everyone should have access
to buying handguns from dealers. But wait...They still can buy from a private
seller. Tie the transaction to a responsible adult/parent when an 18 year old
wants that gun. Then the judgement will come from that adult whether that young
person is mature enough to own a handgun and if he is not, then the onus falls
upon that adult. Like a co-signer of a car loan.
Since Utah is so concerned about the rights of 18-20 yr olds, how about if we
lower the drinking age to 18 as well?
At age 17, with parent's consent, a youngster can join the miltary of this
nation...In boot camp, he/she will be issued a weapon, and at some point while
in training, he/she will be firing that weapon....Within a year,at age 18,
he/she will be somewhere in the Middle East shooting at other humans and being
shot at in return.....Then a year later,at age 19, he/she will separate from the
military and go home.....It's ludicrous to realize that a group of people
in D.C. who have never served in the military, who don't know jack about
guns, can keep this 20 year old man/woman from purchasing a gun so they can go
If you can't own a firearm at 18, then you shouldn't have to serve in
the military at 18. All of those here that are willing to deny an 18 year old
the right to own a firearm should seriously consider what you are saying about
those are willing or are drafted to protect your right to vote each year. I
don't see any of you willing to do your military service to this country.
How arrogantly hypocritical.
This seems like a worthy cause, given the lack of legitimate problems in the
world. Nice to see Utah again throwing in with right-wing extremists. We
wouldn't want the rest of the country to every take us seriously again,
If they really want to use the example of an 18 year old being inducted in the
military why can't they pass a law whereby all honorably discharged
servicemen are exempt from the 21 year old requirement. Seems like common sense
to me. But maybe that is asking too much from our legislators when all they are
really looking for is a fight with the federal government to send a message.
They don't know how to pass legislation that makes sense!!
two cents:I don't see your logic. I know a lot of
"squirrelly" middle-aged adults in Washington State, but I certainly
wouldn't advocate banning all adults in Washington from purchasing a
firearm from an FFL dealer.
If an 18-year old soldier can safely handle a gun, so can his (or her) twin
hermounts: So let me get this straight. An 18 year old who is trained in the
military has no more qualifications to use a firearm than an 18 year old high
school dropout who does who knows what, finds a bag of money and walks in off
the street to buy a handgun at Walmart? C'mon. Even the
logically inept can see this is not valid line of criticism. I
don't have a lot of qualms about an 18 yr old who's pledged their
sacred honor and life to the defense of this country, has had rigorous military
training and is pursuing a worthy goal to be the concern for why we want to keep
guns out of the hands of 18 yr olds... so I don't mind an exception for
them, but for everyone? No thanks,
guns for people under 21? Great Idea! Wonderful! That means the gang bangers
can now get a gun before they get a criminal record that may have been expunged
or reduced to a misdemeanor because of their age.The upside is that
they can now get arrested and tried sooner instead of having to wait until they
are over 21.
Book or Mormon or a gun? Why not take both? Religious nuts and gun nuts seem
to go hand in hand anyway.I love Utah!
Let's lower the drinking age to 18 as well, that's a great combo..
@Janet"It is a fact that the prefrontal cortex – the part
of the brain that controls reasoning and impulses – is not fully developed
until about age 25. This is why many teenagers, especially when hormones are in
high gear, think they’re “ten feet tall and bulletproof.”
Drinking, risky sexual behaviors, and reckless driving (including texting and
driving) are more characteristic of those whose brains haven’t matured.
Why in heaven’s name should they possess guns?" If
that is true then we should not let 18-25 yr olds join the military.
@Ron Burgundy "Book or Mormon or a gun? Why not take both?
Religious nuts and gun nuts seem to go hand in hand anyway."If
someone were to use the N word that would be considered hate speech. But if
someone is called a religious nut nobody seems to mind. I wonder why that is.