It's funny how often people try to argue that the Second Amendment isn't treated like a second-class right, all while ignoring the fact that it's not even remotely treated similarly to other constitutionally protected rights.
For example, there's no age limit on free speech, yet they want to restrict guns to only those over age 21 in many cases. Some just want to bar some aspects of gun ownership to those over that age, though, and those folks just got a bit of a setback on Monday.
You see, concealed carry laws often are restricted just to those over the age of 21. You can worship as you wish before that age and no one would say otherwise. You can speak freely well before that age, and no one seems inclined to create laws preventing that.
But if you want to carry a gun, well, the Third Circuit says you should be able to before that age as well.
From a press release from the Second Amendment Foundation:
an. 13, 2025 – The Second Amendment Foundation has won a victory for young adults in Pennsylvania, where a panel of the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to remand the case back to the District Court with instructions to enter an injunction forbidding the state police from arresting law-abiding 18-20-year-olds for openly carrying firearms during a declared state of emergency.
The case is known as Madison Lara v. Commissioner Pennsylvania State Police.
Joining SAF in the case are the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, including Lara, for whom the case is named. They are represented by attorneys Peter Paterson, Haley N. Proctor, David H. Thompson and John D. Ohlendorf at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C. and Joshua Prince at Prince Law in Bechtelsville, Pa.
It is the second time the Third Circuit has ruled in SAF’s favor on this case. After the initial ruling, the state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which, in turn, remanded the case back to the Third Circuit to reconsider in light of the high court’s recent ruling in Rahimi. The Third Circuit determined that Rahimi changed nothing about their analysis and once again ruled for the plaintiffs. The circuit court then ordered the District Court to enter an injunction in SAF’s favor.
Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Kent A. Jordan, a George W. Bush appointee, noted, “It is undisputed that 18-to-20-year-olds are among ‘the people’ for other constitutional rights such as the right to vote, freedom of speech, the freedom to peaceably assemble and to petition the and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures. We therefore reiterate our holding that 18-to-20-yearolds are, like other subsets of the American public, presumptively among ‘the people’ to whom Second Amendment rights extend.”
Judge Jordan was joined by Judge D. Brooks Smith, another Bush appointee. Judge L. Felipe Restrepo, a Barack Obama appointee, dissented.
“SAF has maintained all along that 18-20 year olds are unquestionably part of ‘the people’ contemplated by the Second Amendment who have the same rights to keep and bear that any other adult has,” said SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack. “The Third Circuit already agreed with us once, and today it reaffirmed its decision, finding that the Rahimi decision from the Supreme Court changes precisely nothing.”
“There is no language in the Second Amendment that applies only to some age-exclusive subset of the people,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb observed. “We’re delighted the Third Circuit once again has ruled in our favor, and we will continue defending that position.”
That last part by Gottlieb is very important. The Second Amendment says "shall not be infringed," not "shall not be infringed so long as you're old enough to buy alcohol" or anything else suggestive of an age restriction.
It's also interesting that this isn't the first time the state of Pennsylvania has lost this particular case before the Third Circuit.
Look, I get the arguments for restricting guns to those in their 20s. The human brain doesn't stop developing until around the age of 25. Until then, people are impulsive and far more likely to commit violent outbursts; outbursts that will potentially be worse if a gun is present.
However, we allow people to do a lot of other stuff before the age of 25, including carrying firearms in most states, really. After all, the cut-off, as noted before, is often 21. I don't know of any state with a higher age requirement.
If you want to change that, then change the age of majority to 25 or whatever across the board. Don't allow them to drink, vote, sign contracts, or anything. If you're not willing to even discuss that, then you're not serious about believing age is an issue when it comes to exercising one's Second Amendment rights. Instead, you want the Second Amendment treated as a second-class right that warrants an age limit that would never be tolerated on most other rights.