18-to-20-year-olds can’t be barred from buying handguns, judge rules

[NolanVoyd]

What does this have to do with owning pistols? Pistols don't equal murder. Also 18 year olds can buy rifles and shotguns.

Not saying anything about the legal age of drinking because that's a different subject explain to me why 18-year-olds need to be prohibited from purchasing a pistol?

It was a direct response to your post.

Review.

 

[CLAX1911]

No idea.

So you're just randomly posting nonsense on a thread about a completely different topic?

 

[CLAX1911]

It was a direct response to your post.

Review.

Not interested. The topic is that the supreme Court said it's unconstitutional to deny adults their constitutional rights based on age.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Care to cite an example or two ?

I added a bit to that post after you read it. More detail.

As for examples.

Speed limits, seat belt laws, other safety regulations.

 

[CLAX1911]

I added a bit to that post after you read it. More detail.

As for examples.

Speed limits, seat belt laes, other safety regulations.

A limit on a constitutional right needs to be justified.

So justify it please.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Not interested.

Then why did you say it?

 

[CLAX1911]

Then why did you say it?

Why did I say what?

 

[CLAX1911]

And the framers probably never dreamed that there would come a time when there would be more guns in the US than people.

I think they would be thrilled with that. After they just fought off the British empire, tens of millions of people in the country being armed with that was the idea that was the purpose of the second amendment.

 

[Rich2018]

I added a bit to that post after you read it. More detail.

As for examples.

Speed limits, seat belt laws, other safety regulations.

How are any of those a compromise ?

 

[Fledermaus]

How are any of those a compromise ?

Your inability to figure that out is stunning.

 

[NolanVoyd]

How are any of those a compromise ?

Most cars do 120 easy.

Compromise between the freedom to use your car to its full potential and the general welfare.

 

[Rich2018]

Most cars do 120 easy.

Compromise between the freedom to use your car to its full potential and the general welfare.

But a speed limit, is a hard and fast limit. There is no compromise - max speed limits don't differentiate between make/model of car.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Why did I say what?

Review.

 

[CLAX1911]

Review.

I didn't say review. That's a weird thing to post.

 

[NolanVoyd]

But a speed limit, is a hard and fast limit. There is no compromise - max speed limits don't differentiate between make/model of car.

It's a compromise between freedom and safety.

Just like the 21 drinking age

 

[NolanVoyd]

I didn't say review. That's a weird thing to post.

You seem confused.

Yiu should re read our interaction. It'll all make sense.

Review.

 

[CLAX1911]

You seem confused.

Yiu should re read our interaction. It'll all make sense.

Review.

It makes sense to me now.

Why are you trying to hijack the thread with discussion about drinking and?

 

[Rich2018]

It's a compromise between freedom and safety.

Just like the 21 drinking age

It's still a hard limit, but I see your point for speed limits. I'm sure police forces would limit us to 10 MPH on all roads if they could.

 

[NolanVoyd]

It makes sense to me now.

Why are you trying to hijack the thread with discussion about drinking and?

Again.

Review.

I am not.

I didn't bring it up. I was responding to somone who did.

 

[CLAX1911]

Again.

Review.

Review what?

I am not.

I didn't bring it up. I was responding to somone who did.

You're intentionally avoiding the topic to shout review at me as if that means anything.

You haven't made a post on the subject yet why is that why are you here?

Why are you so afraid to talk about the subject?

 

[Rich2018]

Review what?

You're intentionally avoiding the topic to shout review at me as if that means anything.

You haven't made a post on the subject yet why is that why are you here?

Why are you so afraid to talk about the subject?

As if you read anything that's posted.

 

[KingLeo]

I think they would be thrilled with that. After they just fought off the British empire, tens of millions of people in the country being armed with that was the idea that was the purpose of the second amendment.

Only because at the time there was no standing army. The militia was all we had. Not the case today.

 

[KingLeo]

Not true - The framers' object was that every citizen should have a gun:

"The great object is that every man be armed... Everyone who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Sam Adams

Written at a time when a single shot musket was high tech and there was no standing US army. Citizen militias was all we had.

 

[CLAX1911]

Only because at the time there was no standing army. The militia was all we had. Not the case today.

The army and the militia serve two very different purposes.

The militias purpose was never national defense

 

[KingLeo]

The army and the militia serve two very different purposes.

The militias purpose was never national defense

At the time of our revolutionary war they were one and the same.