20-year-old Dick's employees are quitting their jobs

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Shamrock6

18-21 should be able to purchase with military id or training certificate certifying ones ability to bare arms.

Strange, I can't seem to recall that part of the 2nd.

Strange, I don't seem to recall the 2nd ever specifying an age. According strictly to the letter of the Constitution, we shouldn't have gun free zones and 6 year olds should have access to weapons everywhere.

Read the thread before posting nonsense please.

The right to bare arms refers to ABILITY and not age.

originally posted by: howtonhawky

Read the thread before posting nonsense please.

The right to bare arms refers to ABILITY and not age.

You're right on this point. The right to "bare arms" refers to ability and not age. "Bare arms" means "sleveless." Anyone with arms at any age can indeed have bare arms.

Now, had you typed "bear arms" (the phrasing used in the Constitution) it would mean something else.

a reply to: Byrd

bare bear also means to handle or carry and to give birth

just as infringe does not mean to encroach but when written in the constitution means to BREAK

givin those terms we can see how we can regulate the second

also we are the militia

using old dictionaries we can gather a better perspective of exactly what the founders had in mind

a reply to: howtonhawky

If it's to do with "ability", why is there any age at all attached to this.
Why not 15, or 13, or even 8 year olds?

Maybe because ability is combined with a certain maturity level?

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: howtonhawky

If it's to do with "ability", why is there any age at all attached to this.
Why not 15, or 13, or even 8 year olds?

Maybe because ability is combined with a certain maturity level?

Excellent point and question.

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

That is why i purpose that raising the age limit to buy firearms to 21 is acceptable as long as there is a military clause and a co-signer or basically an ability clause allowing one to show sanity and ability.Which really go hand in hand.

In other words just like a parent or guardian having the right to buy youngsters a beer they should have the right to buy a child a weapon and see that responsibility is used.

To me this seems fair and i believe also that when regulating the militia which is every american we should take all influences into account. Such as violent media mind altering drugs and training on the handle and use of weapon along with a decent set of moral guidelines such as never point weapon at people and animals....

I see nothing wrong with interpreting the 2nd to mean that we just as the military can have a set of standards that will allow for the safety and freedom of our country.

a reply to: howtonhawky

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

But if you're an adult at 18, then why cannot you not have alcohol in the US until 21?

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: howtonhawky

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

But if you're an adult at 18, then why cannot you not have alcohol in the US until 21?

ABILITY

Most at 18 do not have the ability to handle it.

Statics show this. It is not based on emotions and such...like the purposed new gun law changes.

Most of these screaming march for our lives do not understand that they are putting forth a contradiction of their rights and if successful then they will have givin away there right to march in the first place.

I wonder when they will march for the 1st amendment to be changed to 21.

Clearly they have no ability to march with reason or logic if they seek to break down the protections that allow for them to march in the first place. Then we have some adults claiming these polisci students are our future leaders.

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo

You are being idiotic.

Do you really believe that having your GOD givin rights taken away to be no big deal?

Get your head where it can see daylight before they take that too.

I don’t believe in God. How can she give me rights?

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: howtonhawky

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

But if you're an adult at 18, then why cannot you not have alcohol in the US until 21?

ABILITY

Most at 18 do not have the ability to handle it.

Statics show this. It is not based on emotions and such...like the purposed new gun law changes.

All those other countries throughout the world where drinking age is lower would like to discus your “statics”

a reply to: eNumbra

drinkingage.procon.org...

Most countries seem to be under 21 according to the map in that link.

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: eNumbra

drinkingage.procon.org...

Most countries seem to be under 21 according to the map in that link.

The vast majority in fact; it was even 18 in America at one point.

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: howtonhawky

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

But if you're an adult at 18, then why cannot you not have alcohol in the US until 21?

ABILITY

Most at 18 do not have the ability to handle it.

Statics show this. It is not based on emotions and such...like the purposed new gun law changes.

All those other countries throughout the world where drinking age is lower would like to discus your “statics”

bs they are not my stats

i drank plenty enough under 21

originally posted by: DoubleDNH

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: GeechQuestInfo

You are being idiotic.

Do you really believe that having your GOD givin rights taken away to be no big deal?

Get your head where it can see daylight before they take that too.

I don’t believe in God. How can she give me rights?

education at its finest

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Read the thread before posting nonsense please.

The right to bare arms refers to ABILITY and not age.

Great, so why don't we have any test of ability when buying firearms? If a 6 year old can pass it, why shouldn't they be able to carry?

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: howtonhawky

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

But if you're an adult at 18, then why cannot you not have alcohol in the US until 21?

ABILITY

Most at 18 do not have the ability to handle it.

Statics show this. It is not based on emotions and such...like the purposed new gun law changes.

All those other countries throughout the world where drinking age is lower would like to discus your “statics”

You can't argue with statics, friend.

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: snowspirit
a reply to: howtonhawky

My answer is that because we have accepted 18 as the age when most(majority) reach a level of maturity accepted to be adulthood.

But if you're an adult at 18, then why cannot you not have alcohol in the US until 21?

ABILITY

Most at 18 do not have the ability to handle it.

Statics show this. It is not based on emotions and such...like the purposed new gun law changes.

All those other countries throughout the world where drinking age is lower would like to discus your “statics”

bs they are not my stats

i drank plenty enough under 21

Sorry, what are you calling BS on? You’ve just contradicted your own post which I replied to.

a reply to: introvert

It doesn't specifically say it, but it is the definition of Militia - "all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service". Another example of hidden protections in the constitution. It keeps the government from saying that the militia is the military.

a reply to: eNumbra

just the part where you inferred that the stats are mine.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Read the thread before posting nonsense please.

The right to bare arms refers to ABILITY and not age.

Great, so why don't we have any test of ability when buying firearms? If a 6 year old can pass it, why shouldn't they be able to carry?

They can and do carry

under the set maturity age of 18 it is the guardians responsibility to ensure that the minor is acting responsible.

i know plenty youngsters that have drawn blood

it would be no different if the age was 21 except we are saying that they are able at 18 to exercise their adulthood rights

under the aca the coverage limits were raised to 24 and that would have greatly increased the need for an ability test for firearms just like driving