Lawsuit to strike down federal law banning FFL handgun sales to minors

[vvvvvvv]

The National Rifle Association and two individuals under the age of twenty-one have asked the Supreme Court to strike down a federal law that bans licensed gun dealers from selling handguns to minors. A federal appeals court upheld that law, ruling that Congress was justified in believing that easy commercial access to pistols for teenagers leads to violent crime.

The new case, NRA v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (docket 13-137), raises one of the broadest challenges to a gun control law to reach the Court in the five years since the Second Amendment was interpreted to protect a personal right to have a gun, at least for self-defense.




Under a law that dates to 1968, Congress imposed a series of limitations on access to guns for anyone under the age of twenty-one. The only restriction specifically at issue in the new case is a ban on purchasing a handgun from a federally licensed gun dealer, for anyone who is eighteen, nineteen, or twenty years old.


The law does not ban those in that age group from obtaining guns, or even from obtaining handguns. They may get such a weapon from their parents or a guardian, and may even buy a handgun in a private sale. They may also buy a rifle or shotgun from a licensed dealer. What is banned altogether is the purchase of a handgun from a dealer - the source that the NRA told the Court is “the most common” and “most logical.”

NRA v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

 

[Surveyor1653]

This is a prohibition whose time to die has come.

 

[n8thegr8]

I wish they would strike down the whole damn GCA, but that'll never happen

 

[vvvvvvv]

I wish they would strike down the whole damn GCA, but that'll never happen

If the NRA would get behind that (and getting rid of NFA), I might actually support them.

 

[RickN]

If someone is old enough to vote, fight and possibly die for this country, etc, etc, they are old enough to own handguns.

 

[twoguns?]

If someone is old enough to vote, fight and possibly die for this country, etc, etc, they are old enough to own handguns.

They can own them , they just cant buy them from a Licensed Dealer...still BS.

If you realize how easy it is for someone to obtain a handgun from...Anyone ..except a Lic Dealer, the streets are full of them.

 

[rebelracer79]

If someone is old enough to vote, fight and possibly die for this country, etc, etc, they are old enough to own handguns.

But not to drink a beer?

 

[mugsy]

But not to drink a beer?

I agree with your sentiment but my solution would be to ensure that voting, drinking/intoxicant possession and use , and voting should all be limited to those age 21 and over. While any individual can be a fool, the under 21 crowd have consistently proven themselves, as a group, to be the most ridiculously uniformed voters (by age group), the most prone to voting on a purely emotional and irrational basis, and the group least able to govern their own passions and whims in a manner that seems necessary to a citizen of a self-governing republic.

As for service in the military - maybe you could earn those privileges of citizenship a little early after completing a stint in the military and being honorably discharged. Just thinking on a Sunday evening.

 

[n8thegr8]

I understand they're going for the low hanging fruit and trying to get the minimum age reduced, but the whole thing seems silly to me. Why create another arbitrary minimum age? Doing so further validates the presumption that the federal government has the right to decide who gets to exercise their constitutionally protected rights and how they exercise those rights. The entire FFL system is based on the idea that someone requires permission from the federal government in order to exercise a natural right. The more we play into this, the more harm we do to the cause of Liberty.

 

[rebelracer79]

I agree with your sentiment but my solution would be to ensure that voting, drinking/intoxicant possession and use , and voting should all be limited to those age 21 and over. While any individual can be a fool, the under 21 crowd have consistently proven themselves, as a group, to be the most ridiculously uniformed voters (by age group), the most prone to voting on a purely emotional and irrational basis, and the group least able to govern their own passions and whims in a manner that seems necessary to a citizen of a self-governing republic.

As for service in the military - maybe you could earn those privileges of citizenship a little early after completing a stint in the military and being honorably discharged. Just thinking on a Sunday evening.

I'd say take it a step further and only let land owners vote, as for the drinking and military service I say at 18 the state considers you an adult.....