In the wake of Parkland, normally pro-gun Florida did something colossally stupid. Lawmakers passed a number of gun control measures. One, a red flag law, has tons of problems all on its own, but the second is one that is the heart of a matter before a federal court now.
The law prohibits people under the age of 21 from buying long guns, and while the court is grappling with it at the moment, they shouldn't be.
The reason? Because this is so obviously wrong that there shouldn't be any quibbling about any of it.
Amid evolving interpretations of how firearms can be restricted, a federal appeals court on Tuesday grappled with the constitutionality of a Florida law that bars people under age 21 from buying rifles and other long guns.
Florida lawmakers and then-Gov. Rick Scott included the age restriction in a sweeping school safety measure passed shortly after [mass murderer's name redacted], who was 19 at the time, used a semiautomatic rifle to kill 17 students and faculty members at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018. Federal law already prevented people under 21 from buying handguns.
The National Rifle Association challenged the state law, but Chief U.S. District Mark Walker upheld the age restriction. A three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also upheld the law, but the NRA asked the full appeals court to consider the case.
Like I said, this should be a no-brainer. However, it seems there's some disagreement on that fact.
John Parker Sweeney, a lawyer representing the NRA, said the age restriction is unconstitutional because it “was not a tradition known … at the time the Second Amendment was first adopted” in the 18th century.
Judge Robin Rosenbaum was among the members of the court who pressed Sweeney on the cut-off age for purchasing guns.
“Here’s the problem with that. The problem is that the common law at that time gave no rights to anyone under 21, including the ability, the practical ability, to purchase a firearm,” Rosenbaum said, adding that people under 21 largely worked for their parents on farms, did not have their own sources of income and were unable to enter into contracts to purchase guns on credit.
“They couldn’t sue, they couldn’t do a lot of things,” Rosenbaum said.
In addition, states at the time made parents responsible for purchasing firearms for people under age 21 who were part of the militia or the military, Rosenbaum said.
“So how does that establish 18 as the number?” she asked.
Sweeney pointed out that anyone at that time could take cash and buy a gun.
Recommended
However, my answer to Rosenbaum's question is that the 26th Amendment establishes that. The amendment, passed in 1971, read, in part, "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."
That would include one's right to keep and bear arms.
I mean, I get that people have reading comprehension problem, but it doesn't get much simpler than that.
Then again, these are the same people who can't understand "shall not be infringed," so I shouldn't be surprised.
Luckily, not all of the judges are as...challenging as Rosenbaum appears to be.
Some of the judges, however, questioned the justification of prohibiting 18-year-olds, who are adults, from purchasing guns. The Florida law allows people under age 21 to possess or use guns, such as guns they receive as gifts.
“One of the issues I have is, one of the arguments that you make is that the ban, quote, ‘ensures that parents continue to play a key role in supervising and facilitating 18-to-20 year olds’ access to firearms.’ The issue is, though, an 18-year-old in the state of Florida or anywhere in any of the 50 states is a legal adult, and parents have no role or responsibility,” Judge Barbara Lagoa, a former Florida Supreme Court justice, said.
Bingo.
Now, if you want to raise the age of majority to 21 across the board, then so be it. One of the arguments for age limits on guns is that frontal lobe development in the brain lags a bit behind until the age of 25, which leads to irrationality. In short, it's why young adults act stupid and, in many cases, dangerous. If you're going to use that as grounds to remove gun rights from people, then remove them across the board for everyone under 21.
We also shouldn't draft them, enlist them in the military, or anything else except allow them to go to school.
Since that's not going to happen, I'm not exactly open to precluding them buying guns as lawful adults.
Plus, this isn't like these folks can just buy a handgun instead. The federal age for purchasing a handgun is 21.
So across the board, this is wrong, and while the court is struggling with this, it shouldn't be that difficult.
