21 or older to buy AR-15?

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

AndyC
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 9710
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:34 pm
Location: Richardson, TX

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#31

Post by AndyC » Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:54 pm

I'm not in the mood to give the opposition anything - certainly not from a position of fear that I/we will lose something and especially because I will not appease scum like this:

Image
Remember Kitty Genovese

Image

Amateurs skip safety-checks - pros don't.
Preferred Travel Agent - 72 Virgins Dating Club
There's nothing quite like the offer of 230 grains to a man's chest to remind him of his manners

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 23666
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#32

Post by The Annoyed Man » Wed Feb 21, 2018 12:30 am

What Andy said.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5743
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#33

Post by Liberty » Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:39 am

Its been a tough week, Cornyn and Trump willing to sell out Members here with soft stances. The selling out of the 18-20 year olds is reprehensible.

At 18 I could be held liable as an adult. not allowed to vote or buy a beer, at 19 received a letter requesting I serve the Uncle, I was issued an M16 and M60 while I was 20. When I was finally allowed to vote at 21, I didn't get my absentee ballot in time at my APO address. Some say it was an intentional Democratic plot.

So we keep raising a generation of snowflakes, refusing to let them be adults is part of the problem. We should be working on allowing our 18 year olds the right as adults. We should be demanding the release of restrictions of our arms (suppressors arbitrary barrel lengths) We should be demanding the availability of modern fully automatic weapons. Instead we are signing on to bump stock agreements, and raising the age for semi-auto rifles instead. We even have people willing to limit our magazine sizes. What else are we going to concede to our enemies? Where does it stop? After comfiscation?
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


NNT
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 6:22 pm

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#34

Post by NNT » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:39 am

We can give up a few rights in the name of peace, right?

The Munich agreement worked to pacify Hitler, right? Upon return to Britain, Chamberlain declared that the meeting had achieved “peace in our time.”

See how easy that was, history shows it works. :headscratch

User avatar

Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 10657
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#35

Post by Oldgringo » Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:51 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Oldgringo wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:
{snip}

True, but the rifles they were using were the ones used by the military at the time. which is what the second amendment is all about. Well, that and the shall not be infringed thing, which is what you are advocating.
Please be careful, TAM. Your statement plays right into the hands of the liberals who say....well, you know what they say about the 2nd Amendment in particular, and the Constitution in general.
That wasn’t my statement, it was anygunanywhere’s.
My apologies, TAM. I must have either under or over 'snipped'. BTW, I own more than one 30 round magazine.


jb2012
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 1:12 pm

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#36

Post by jb2012 » Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:02 pm

NNT wrote:We can give up a few rights in the name of peace, right?

The Munich agreement worked to pacify Hitler, right? Upon return to Britain, Chamberlain declared that the meeting had achieved “peace in our time.”

See how easy that was, history shows it works. :headscratch
We "gave up a few rights in the name of peace" in 1964 GCA, in 1934 with the NFA, and in 1994 with the AWB. No we are done. I don't know why you want to be a part of the gun community when you're so willing to bend over for the anti gun crowd.

User avatar

Flightmare
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1747
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:00 pm
Location: Plano, TX

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#37

Post by Flightmare » Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:11 pm

jb2012 wrote:
NNT wrote:We can give up a few rights in the name of peace, right?

The Munich agreement worked to pacify Hitler, right? Upon return to Britain, Chamberlain declared that the meeting had achieved “peace in our time.”

See how easy that was, history shows it works. :headscratch
We "gave up a few rights in the name of peace" in 1964 GCA, in 1934 with the NFA, and in 1994 with the AWB. No we are done. I don't know why you want to be a part of the gun community when you're so willing to bend over for the anti gun crowd.
We really need a sarcasm font. That is how I perceived NNT's post, pure sarcasm.
Deplorable lunatic since 2016


NNT
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 6:22 pm

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#38

Post by NNT » Wed Feb 21, 2018 6:32 pm

:iagree:
If the Munich agreement had worked there would have been no war after 1938


imkopaka
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:30 pm
Location: Lamesa, TX

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#39

Post by imkopaka » Wed Feb 21, 2018 6:50 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote:
TexasJohnBoy wrote:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1G42SR
“I think that’s certainly something that’s on the table for us to discuss and that we expect to come up over the next couple of weeks,” White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said at a daily briefing when asked if President Donald Trump believed there should be an age limit for the purchase of AR-15-type rifles.
There is ALREADY an age limit to buy an AR15. The age limit is 18. The Marine Corps will give a fully automatic weapon to an 18 year old Marine, teach him how to be maximally aggressive with it, and turn him loose on people who need to have the Marines turned loose upon them. And yet those same 18 year olds manage to differentiate between their military duty in combat, and their private lives among civilians back home. Raising the age limit to buy an AR15 is an insult to those young men and women that we also expect to stand in the gap in our national defense. Defense of what? The “right” of other Americans to take away the rights of those 18 year olds? Those jerks ought to be ashamed of themselves for having such unworthy thoughts.

It’s one thing to say that it’s a subject on the table for discussion, but it would be completely unacceptable if the conclusion of that discussion was anything other than, ‘no, we’re not going to raise the age limit on our fellow citizens’.
Truer words were never spoken. Semper Fi :patriot:
Never bring a knife to a gun fight.
Carry gun: Springfield XD Tactical .45


Weg
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 558
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#40

Post by Weg » Wed Feb 21, 2018 6:51 pm

James Holmes, Jared Loughner, and now this pathetic scumbag, know what they all have in common? They are clearly guilty mass shooters who are still alive. We don't even swiftly execute those who live through their mass murders and people want to tell me what I can own? Nah.

User avatar

Crossroads
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:33 am
Location: Round Rock, TX

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#41

Post by Crossroads » Thu Feb 22, 2018 1:37 am

Liberty wrote:Its been a tough week, Cornyn and Trump willing to sell out Members here with soft stances. The selling out of the 18-20 year olds is reprehensible.

At 18 I could be held liable as an adult. not allowed to vote or buy a beer, at 19 received a letter requesting I serve the Uncle, I was issued an M16 and M60 while I was 20. When I was finally allowed to vote at 21, I didn't get my absentee ballot in time at my APO address. Some say it was an intentional Democratic plot.

So we keep raising a generation of snowflakes, refusing to let them be adults is part of the problem. We should be working on allowing our 18 year olds the right as adults. We should be demanding the release of restrictions of our arms (suppressors arbitrary barrel lengths) We should be demanding the availability of modern fully automatic weapons. Instead we are signing on to bump stock agreements, and raising the age for semi-auto rifles instead. We even have people willing to limit our magazine sizes. What else are we going to concede to our enemies? Where does it stop? After comfiscation?
Agreed
Adding to the 18 as an adult. IMHO when you turn 18 you should have all rights and privileges of a US citizen. Saying they're too immature to have a beer or smoke but they can decide what college to go to and pick a career, go into the Military, vote, get married and have children, be tried for a crime and receive punishments as an adult, etc.

Getting married and having children is one of the most important decisions a person can make in their life. You're telling them it's OK for you to create life and raise that life how you see fit; but, you can't drink, smoke, or buy a gun. No worries if things don't work out and you add to the broken family problem in this country that is the cause for all sorts of other problems.

Lower everything to 18 or raise everything to 21. Don't pick and choose. I'm for 18, raise your children to be an adult. They're not your friends, they're your kids.
Neither a wise man or a brave man lies down on the tracks of history to wait for the train of the future to run over him.


WTR
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#42

Post by WTR » Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:04 am

My wife is Conservative and very pro 2A. She has been shooting since age 7, has her own pistol, supports all my firearm related activities and purchases. However, she has also has taught Neuro Anatomy, Neuro Physiology and Neuro Pharmacology at a graduate class level. She says the brain at 18 is not fully developed and has issues with decision making and impulse control to name a couple (especially males). She would like to see the minimum age to purchase a firearm be 25. Although, she would compromise to 21. I think the insurance companies have figured it out as rates greatly decrease at 25.


1911 Raptor
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:56 am

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#43

Post by 1911 Raptor » Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:59 am

Oldgringo wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:
Oldgringo wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
Oldgringo wrote: I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.
Define "high capacity". How does adding 1 second for a reload every 10 rounds change things dramatically?
IIRC, the last time the high cap issue rose its head, high was generally defined as >10. As for reload time, I'm not qualified to answer that except that I can't reload nothin' in one second.

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.
Let's see, apple meet orange.
A firepower limit is a firepower limit. That said, I can't recall any instance where a shotgun was used to gun down masses of folk?

BTW, our founding fathers' rifles, you know, the guys who drafted the Constitution with its beautiful 2nd Amendment, had a magazine capacity of ONE (1).
Only because that was the latest and greatest of that time period and there was no restriction on citizens ownership! I believe that if semi autos and full auto had existed at that point in time our founding fathers would have written the second amendment exactly the same way. They saw no reason to limit ownership of weapons to the common man.


mrvmax
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1579
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Friendswood
Contact:

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#44

Post by mrvmax » Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:52 am

WTR wrote:My wife is Conservative and very pro 2A. She has been shooting since age 7, has her own pistol, supports all my firearm related activities and purchases. However, she has also has taught Neuro Anatomy, Neuro Physiology and Neuro Pharmacology at a graduate class level. She says the brain at 18 is not fully developed and has issues with decision making and impulse control to name a couple (especially males). She would like to see the minimum age to purchase a firearm be 25. Although, she would compromise to 21. I think the insurance companies have figured it out as rates greatly decrease at 25.
I have read and heard similar info before. To be fair, if we did that then the minimum age for entry to the military would need to be raised too along with the age to purchase cigarettes and alcohol. We would also need to raise the age for getting a drivers license and to vote to 21. It needs to be done across the board or not done at all, it’s not logical to pick and choose, if they aren’t fully developed for one thing then they aren’t for anything.


treadlightly
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:17 pm

Re: 21 or older to buy AR-15?

#45

Post by treadlightly » Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:02 am

Oldgringo wrote: I'll be really surprised if the issue of high(?) capacity magazines doesn't come up again real soon. I, for one, won't have a problem with it.

< snip >

Since we're on the subject, where is the big objection to shotguns being limited to three shots for fur and feathers. That has been the rule ever since I was knee high to a grasshopper.
Please pay attention, people. This is how we'll keep our rights! Ban high capacity, just like they ban it for our 2nd Amendment brethren who make dove, not war.

Clearly, the founding fathers never foresaw the dietary mayhem of bacon wrapped terducken on one reload. Think of the little ones at that same dinner table who could be crippled by fat. Ban high capacity mass shooting for the children, and I'm not talking about bacon wrapped terducken with a side of Jonathon Swift's modest veal. Think of their little beer guts!

We ban high capacity shotguns for killing duckies. If you really feel a need for bacon wrapped terducken, you can take the time to educate your children about congestive heart failure, and you can take the time to reload, too.

Note the specific way this proposed capacity ban ties to mass shootings of unarmed people as well as actual sitting ducks.

Just as we ban high capacity in shotguns while they are used for the practice of bird zapping, we should ban high, I mean "normal," capacity magazines while used for the practice of mass murder.

While y'all are debating with the gunman about whether to call the police because of the killing, or the game warden because of how many rounds the killer had in his gun at one time, I'll try to do the right thing with my subcompact Sig. Be warned, though. I'm a hypocrite. Due to magazine capacity, my little Sig is no six-shooter and it's wonderfully felonious in California.

Here in Texas, twelve in the bullpen, one in the chamber (always!), and another 17 in my spare magazine gives me that dreadful 30 round reserve and a happy spring in my step.

While somebody searches Google for the game warden's number, I'll petition Providence for an opportunity, a stable sight picture, and the strength to live with myself, in that order.

Note to Oldgringo - I'm with you in spirit. Violence in any form sickens me, and against children is a special crime against God. I respectfully oppose restricting gun rights as a cure to evil. If anything, as long as cold dead hands prevail, the debate will concentrate on firearms. Political capital that could be used in winnable fights against other rights will be wasted - as long as cold dead hands prevail. Guns protect us in many ways that never involve a shot fired. I may be (literally) dead wrong, but I prefer the risk of death to the certainty of lost freedom. Just one lonely opinion, of course, and out of step with the times. I cherish reading your thoughts, as well as all those posted here.

Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”