Minnesota ban on 18- to 20-year-olds obtaining handgun permits is unconstitutional, federal appeals court says
Minnesota ban on 18- to 20-year-olds obtaining handgun permits is unconstitutional, federal appeals court says
Minnesota’s ban on 18- to 20-year-olds obtaining a permit to publicly carry a handgun violates the US Constitution, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
You're viewing a single thread.
-
Well tbh if we send them to war to die why are we limiting their constitutional rights?
If 21 is the new age of adulthood, then society should start acting like it instead of doing this selective circle jerk. Otherwise, such regulations have no legal leg to stand on.
-
I agree with you. But, that's not how things work.
We've neglected public education and mental health for roughly forty years. The establishment wants a complete monopoly on violence. And, laws are only enforced when convenient for the ruling class. The state has caused an issue - stupid unstable people with guns - and will now use it as an excuse to further monopolize use of violence as a means.
-
that's not how things work.
I am not following this tbh
-
Society agrees with you. Government replies, "It's Tuesday. Bend over."
Modern governance is your oppressor, not your savior. That's why it doesn't make sense.
-
Thanks and touché
-
We've neglected public education and mental health for roughly forty years.
The state has caused an issue - stupid unstable people with guns
Then:
The state... will now use (stupid and unstable people with guns) as an excuse
Their means are:
laws are only enforced when convenient for the ruling class
Their goal is:
The establishment wants a complete monopoly on violence.
If the state threatens violence to get their way, then they don't want to worry about violent self defense from the citizens with no other practical alternative.
For example, if a cop is beating an innocent person in the street then the state donesn't want a radical revolutionary executing the cop and then making the body disappear, trusting strangers to see nothing, to remember nothing.
-
-
-
-
-
-
We aren't sending them to war to die, there hasn't been a draft in half a century
-
You can argue morally but legally there's nothing in the constitution defining what an adult is except for the 26th amendment and that specifically talks about the right to vote. In the case of voting Oregon v Mitchell decided that it was unconstitutional to force states to lower there voting age to 18 for state and local elections without an amendment, which eventually was added. Barring another amendment passing why can't states choose to decide what they define as adults for gun ownership?
-
Oh we're not? Did we not just get out of 20 years of a war?
You'll hand an 18 year old a belt fed machinegun and a mortar system that will damage their brain every time they fire it.
But god help us all if they have a pistol, beer, or cigarette?
-
Clearly because federal appeals court said so?
States can do as they please my point was more about how clown these rules look
-
-
There is zero logic in your comment. I don't even know what "selective circle jerk" is supposed to be.
-
I think the implication is the disparity in the ages that people are allowed to do things.
Children can get married, you can drive at 16, go to war at 18, but can't drink until 21. So at what point are you considered an adult?
-
Apparently whatever the political regime at the time of legislation needs.
Most recent and depraved example of this... "updates" to child labour laws so migrant kids can slave in slaughter houses while domsetic child slaves serve your shiti goyslop until 12am at MikieDs
Can we go any lower? Asking for a friend.
-
-
So there is logic in sending young adults armed to fight wars but at the same time limit their access to fire arms domestically based on ???
-
-