On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:54:40 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:
On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 4:28:35 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/23/2018 3:28 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:04:02 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
Not at all. I agree with you 100%. I think it should be 21 for *all*
firearms. Don't know if 25 or 30 would fly legally since it's just an
arbitrary age. I agree with the comment by many of the teenaged
students involved in the Florida shootings. If you aren't old enough at
18 to buy beer, you shouldn't be old enough to buy an AR-15.
The biggest problem I have with that is that at 18, you're old enough to be tried as an adult and to die for your country. However, you can't buy a beer or a gun? Uncle Sam can give you one to hold when you're dead. It seems disconnected to me. I do realize that the 18 year olds that are in the armed services are far more mature than some kid living in his parent's basement, or going to college on mom and dad's dime.
I've still no problem with 21 years old, for a military style weapon. Yes, they can serve in the
armed forces at 18, but they get a gun and bullets only after a lot of training. And they're sent to
face an enemy only after a whole lot more training. I could see making an exception for an
individual who has a DD 214 with the honorable discharge.