Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Thursday, July 02, 2009

Minors, the Second Amendment, and incorporation

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Forget the U.S. Supreme Court, and what it may, or may not, rule, if it rules one way or another on incorporation anytime soon. We're still left with the fact that 9th Circuit precedent now holds that the Second Amendment applies to the states, and thus the Second Amendment is at play here (not to mention, as Mr. Reitz points out in his Supreme Court of Washington blog, that Washington's state constitution has its own explicity protection of the right to keep and bear arms).

The question thus becomes one of whether or not the Second Amendment protects a minor's possession of a firearm. Readers might guess that I'll have difficulty finding a way of reconciling shall not be infringed with a lack of protection for such a right. Those readers would be correct. [More]
Today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Hope it's worth your time.


Anonymous said...

There's got to be a point where we the people, and the law, draw the line at responsible gun ownership vs irresponsible gun ownership.

Example: We do not allow persons with criminal assault, or murder convictions, to posess guns. Same with those involuntarily committed to a mental health facility or under a physicians care for mental health problems.

So, somewhere in the past, a similar line has been drawn for persons under 18 years old vs persons over 18 years old. Is it a correct assessment? Should it be re-thought and possibly re-drawn? I don't have any answers - yet.

B Woodman

Thirdpower said...

As a parent, I'm mixed. Do we go down the slippery-slope and say it's OK for grade school children to walk around w/ handguns? Drop the age to 16? 12?

With parents legally responsible for youth under the age of 18, who becomes responsible/accountable should something happen?

It's a legitimate debate that needs to be examined.

Initially I think we should look at getting the handgun/long-gun ages at all levels dropped to age 18.

straightarrow said...

You guys need to man up and just admit you grew up in fear and self-doubt. You don't trust yourselves, or at least,looking back from here you realize you weren't trustworthy when you were young. At what age did you become people? Is it something you knew, or just accepted because others said "Today you are mature enough to yada,yada, yada...."

I owned my first gun when I was nine. I still own it. Before I was ten I was allowed to go by myself to hunt or target shoot. Being pretty poor, once we learned to shoot we didn't waste much ammunition on things we couldn't eat.

If either of you had advanced the positions you espouse today, back then, men would have looked at you with a great deal of skepticism as to your manliness. Sorry, but that is the truth. Men expected and demanded their children be responsible. Nothing less was acceptable.

Of course, you must realize this was a culture where five year old boys were plowing with tractors, not a lot of them, but by the time they were eight most of them.

To suggest that one's son would not be able to exhibit the responsibility to safely carry arms until he was 18, would have garnered father and son the appellation of "fairy", in a polite moment. Much worse when civility wasn't on the agenda.

I'm not defending the harsh view I have just described, but I must say that the men and children produced by it were stronger, more reliable, and more courageous than the generations since.

Teach your children well. Do not rely on some "magical" number of years to endow them with skills and attitudes you should have already taught them.

ishida said...

Straightarrow, I must agree. As a minor, 9-10, I was given my great-grandfather's rifle. It was a Marlin Model 39A (Golden trigger edition). I still own it, though the years I've had it pale in comparison to the years it's existed. Through the years, I was taught how to use various firearms, and allowed to take them out with permission (mostly so he knew what I had out to use). At 16, I was given complete access to the gunsafe and all the firearms, under the stipulation that I bought my own ammo. My grandfather taught me, from an extremely young age, how ot be resonsible and accountable. He made it a point to help me mature, and make me become a trustworthy person.

I believe I'm a better person for it. Now, at 17, I own a fair sum of firearms. Most have little financial value, due to age or proliferation, but they all have emotional value. I've added several to the collection, earned through my own hard work.

Age would not matter were parents still parents. Children should be taught how to be responsible and safe. In days of old, age DIDN'T matter. But parents gave up their duty and responsibility in favor of bubble wrap.