Sen. Feinstein introduces bill to raise rifle purchasing age to 21

[meh]

It just seems so specific to this particular attack: a parent-less immature adult with anger issues who aspired to be a school shooter. It's like the bump stock thing, reactionary and likely preventive of no future attacks. Frankly, I have the same objection to virtually any gun control reaction. OK, so what if he couldn't buy an AR. I'll grant you that AR's are ideal to the purpose, but a Maverick 88 with a fanny pack full of shells would be pretty devastating. Hell, even side-by-side can be operated pretty fast with practice. Is that all they've got, proposals that will reduce the efficiency of the shooter? Seems to me that the FBI and local law enforcement need to be pressured to devote whatever resources it takes to fully investigate these issues. Arrange for staff and teachers who want to be armed to be vetted and trained, regularly trained, as if they were reserve deputies. Analyze each school to determine its security needs, and supplement armed staff with posted armed guards/police as needed. Raise taxes as needed to pay for training and security. I'm not too fond of the last part, but I'll pay if it will solve the problem and short circuit this useless gun control nonsense, because the gun control won't work, which means they'll be back with something else, and then something else, and then something else...

 

[amm5061]

A 14 year old can pass the background check, should they be able to buy guns?

If they can afford it and pass the background check, then yes. In my home state, you can start hunting at 12. So why the f*** can't you buy a rifle or shotgun at 14?

 

[goodzilla]

According to Dems, children are children until they're 26 right (Obamacare)? With all the coddling of our young Americans these days, I'm sure they'll draw the conclusion that 18 is now at least 21...

 

[enbloc]

If I was an OB-GYN I'd give them all a 3 year head start on their birth certificates...

 

[Whutmeworry]

The only thing that makes sense for gun owners supporting this 21 year old BS is extreme fuddism or jealousy. Yes it is possible that some pimple faced 19 year old has a more tacticool AR than you. Deal with it.

Actually I totally agree with this despite my earlier argument that if the age to purchase a gun is raised to 21, the age of responsibility for everything else should be raised to 21 as well. I was merely attempting to illustrate the absurdity in having multiple ages of maturity. A FUDD I AM NOT!!!

 

[Buck F]

If they can afford it and pass the background check, then yes. In my home state, you can start hunting at 12. So why the f*** can't you buy a rifle or shotgun at 14?

Why not at 12 then? What does hunting have to do with anything? Will changing the purchase age affect the 12-14 year old hunters? Is there a pent up demand for guns from the 12-14 year old demographic?

 

[oldguy68]

All this talk of restricting our citizens rights because an adult decided to murderer school children with a certain type of firearm is absurd!

Seriously look at prohibition and the "War on Drugs".
What has it accomplished?

I can get illegal drugs faster than I can get a prescription drug!
As far an illegal firearm transaction. It would take just knowing the right people.

So I'm all for less restrictions when I comes to the second amendment.

Look at question 10A and 10B on an ATF 4473 form and tell me the govt. isn't tracking buyers by race?

Yeah, they say it is only used for back ground checks..Sure they are..

Now we all comply with these all our state and federal infringements on our 2nd amendment rights or maybe we don't...

See banning a certain type of firearm is flat out dangerous thinking.
As well as the whole, we'll just raise the age limit on rifles.

Prohibiting alcohol to teenagers does not stop them all from dying due an alcohol related car accident.
Which I bet they have a much higher chance of being killed by than a firearm related death.
Why are parents not as upset or outraged over the car company that manufactured the car involved.
Because it's only common sense that the alcohol alone in a teenager would be harmless to his health.
My bet is that it was their car that was involved and sometimes it was even the alcohol they supplied or was taken from them.
So lock up all vehicles and alcohol with kids or teenagers in a household like we are required to do as a firearm owner here in MA?
See when a drunk teenage driver is killed in an accident. The media and the kid's parent's call it a tragedy.
Look at the affluenza teen in Texas. If he killed his friends using anything but his pickup he would still be in jail.
But the fact remains they are all dead just the same!

I look at a killing as a killing.
What method and the tool used matters little. Unless it is intended to be a particularly painful and slow way to die.
The end result is the other person is still dead.

Ban every object but air itself and you will have mass suffocation!

Don't want to admit it to yourself yet...


Go to the Boston Holocaust Memorial!

 

[Kevin_NH]

It just seems so specific to this particular attack: a parent-less immature adult with anger issues who aspired to be a school shooter. It's like the bump stock thing, reactionary and likely preventive of no future attacks. Frankly, I have the same objection to virtually any gun control reaction. ... Arrange for staff and teachers who want to be armed to be vetted and trained, regularly trained, as if they were reserve deputies. Analyze each school to determine its security needs, and supplement armed staff with posted armed guards/police as needed. Raise taxes as needed to pay for training and security. I'm not too fond of the last part, but I'll pay if it will solve the problem and short circuit this useless gun control nonsense, because the gun control won't work, which means they'll be back with something else, and then something else, and then something else...

So that may be the best option to head them off at the pass. Tie a "Increase purchase age to 21" bill to a full repeal of the GFSZA and allowing schools to make their own decisions about armed guards/teachers.

 

[Buck F]

So that may be the best option to head them off at the pass. Tie a "Increase purchase age to 21" bill to a full repeal of the GFSZA and allowing schools to make their own decisions about armed guards/teachers.

How about tying it to national carry reciprocity?

 

[amm5061]

Why not at 12 then? What does hunting have to do with anything? Will changing the purchase age affect the 12-14 year old hunters? Is there a pent up demand for guns from the 12-14 year old demographic?

You said 14, not us. And hunting shows that that if a kid is responsible enough to handle a firearm effectively enough to kill an animal, why shouldn't they own said firearm?

Go be a statist somewhere else.

 

[Kevin_NH]

GFSZA and allowing schools to make their own decisions about armed guards/teachers.

How about tying it to national carry reciprocity?

IMHO, that's a stretch and would lead get the media to say we are trying to exploit this tragedy, and we all know that is the anti's gig, not the NRAs.

 

[Buck F]

You said 14, not us. And hunting shows that that if a kid is responsible enough to handle a firearm effectively enough to kill an animal, why shouldn't they own said firearm?

Go be a statist somewhere else.

Who said the can’t own a gun? Buying a gun and owning a gun can be very different things. I think it’s great if 12 or 14 year olds want to hunt or do target practice and if the parents wants to give a kid a gun, that’s fine. I don’t think a 12, 14, 16 or even an 18 year old should be able to buy a gun on their own without the parents involvement just because they can pass a background check.

You sound like a true liberal, trying to shut someone down because they don’t agree with you. If you don’t like what I have to say then don’t read it or reply without the added nonsense.

 

[drgrant]

The other fun thing is some seem to think that holding this wackjob off until 21 would have helped anything.... this kid was a defect since he was very young. Him waiting a couple of years functionally changes nothing.... so apparently the gun banning prick approach is that someone will magically grow out of being a psychopath.

-Mike

 

[HuntMaine]

With 1000s of kids marching on D.C. And several million donated by celebs (announced publicly ) and more being donated to Politicians purses this legislation could have a chance. It will take a lot more gun owners coming out of the shadows and more donations to fight this off.

 

[Lank]

With 1000s of kids marching on D.C. And several million donated by celebs (announced publicly ) and more being donated to Politicians purses this legislation could have a chance. It will take a lot more gun owners coming out of the shadows and more donations to fight this off.

I plan on buying another gun this week. RKBA needs leading indicators.

 

[T-Unit]

Idk if any of you saw the CNN "town hall" last night, but I did and Rubio was like a snowman in front of a flamethrower and was melting before our eyes. He threw in the towel on bump stocks immediately (even though they weren't used in the shooting last week) and by the end, was caving to age restrictions.

Until I see a Republican politician go in front of a crowd and not cave in to every demand of theirs is the day I'll say the 2nd Amendment is safe, because as of the past few days, it's in more danger than ever and it's coming from people we entrusted to secure it.

I get the impression that Rubio and a gang of other Republicans will vote for any anti-gun bill that hits the floor and if a bump stock/age restriction bill contains magazine capacity restrictions, I have no doubt it will pass.

Anybody disagree?

 

[CatSnoutSoup]

And then there is this...

 

[allen-1]

It just seems so specific to this particular attack: a parent-less immature adult with anger issues who aspired to be a school shooter. It's like the bump stock thing, reactionary and likely preventive of no future attacks. Frankly, I have the same objection to virtually any gun control reaction. OK, so what if he couldn't buy an AR. I'll grant you that AR's are ideal to the purpose, but a Maverick 88 with a fanny pack full of shells would be pretty devastating. Hell, even side-by-side can be operated pretty fast with practice. Is that all they've got, proposals that will reduce the efficiency of the shooter? Seems to me that the FBI and local law enforcement need to be pressured to devote whatever resources it takes to fully investigate these issues. Arrange for staff and teachers who want to be armed to be vetted and trained, regularly trained, as if they were reserve deputies. Analyze each school to determine its security needs, and supplement armed staff with posted armed guards/police as needed. Raise taxes as needed to pay for training and security. I'm not too fond of the last part, but I'll pay if it will solve the problem and short circuit this useless gun control nonsense, because the gun control won't work, which means they'll be back with something else, and then something else, and then something else...

If we harden the schools - and please don't misunderstand me - I don't think that's a bad idea at all - in fact I'm absolutely in favor of it - then we simply move the target elsewhere.

We as a society create "gun free zones". Schools are simply the most blatant examples of them - and allow monsters to create horrors.

Israel understands that they're under attack - they're under attack from their ideological enemies and they defend their citizens accordingly, every where, all the time.

The United States doesn't live like that. Yet we have crime in our streets and the occasional maniac running loose making headlines. I as an individual take some precautions, I carry a gun, a knife, a flashlight and a tourniquet. But my grandchildren don't carry those things and shouldn't be expected to. So - how do we protect them?

One hugely vocal segment of our society says GUNZ ARE BAD. Yeah, well - aside from the fact that I disagree with their idealogy, the realities of just how they intend to disarm every single person in America make that a non-starter.

So - how do we protect our kids when they go to the mall? When they go to the park? When they go downtown?

Harden the environments? All of them?

It takes a village to protect a child?

 

[endus]

The other fun thing is some seem to think that holding this wackjob off until 21 would have helped anything.... this kid was a defect since he was very young. Him waiting a couple of years functionally changes nothing.... so apparently the gun banning prick approach is that someone will magically grow out of being a psychopath.

-Mike

I wonder what the psychology of these high school shooters is? I'm sure there's probably stuff to read out there.

The 21 years old thing is problematic for numerous other reasons so I don't support it, but I do wonder whether people would be as motivated if they got a few years distance from High School. It all seems to matter so much until you get a chance to step back and get a wider view.

It certainly doesn't mean that the same person wouldn't cause problems down the road in another area but maybe understanding more about it would help us come up ideas on how to handle the mental health aspect.

 

[drgrant]

I wonder what the psychology of these high school shooters is? I'm sure there's probably stuff to read out there.

The 21 years old thing is problematic for numerous other reasons so I don't support it, but I do wonder whether people would be as motivated if they got a few years distance from High School. It all seems to matter so much until you get a chance to step back and get a wider view.

I don't think in this case it would have mattered much- this kid was just that f***ed up. This wasn't some kid that wanted to just shoot a bully in the face. This was a hula hoop jive turkey, tortured animals for
sport type. Everyone knew this kid was f***ed up, even the outcasts.

I think in other cases you might have a point though- not in reference to gun control; but for example there probably has been one offs where, yeah, some kid shot a bully in the face; but then when they got older, they
regretted it, etc. I don't really consider that type of crime in the same vein as what this fruitloop did though. Hell those two things, in my mind, aren't even on the same planet.

I honestly think most spree shooters- whether its a school or otherwise- are in that really f***ed up in the brain chemistry/wiring category, and the loserdom, desire for fame, and all that stuff just feeds into whatever their
internal malfunction is.

On the other hand- the instances of true full blooded, "clear thinking" sociopaths, IMHO are uncommonly rare. Someone like Anders Brevik, or Timothy McVeigh, people like that- are not in the same category as a typical
spree killer.

-Mike

 

[boiler_eng]

I don't think in this case it would have mattered much- this kid was just that f***ed up. This wasn't some kid that wanted to just shoot a bully in the face. This was a hula hoop jive turkey, tortured animals for
sport type. Everyone knew this kid was f***ed up, even the outcasts.

I think in other cases you might have a point though- not in reference to gun control; but for example there probably has been one offs where, yeah, some kid shot a bully in the face; but then when they got older, they
regretted it, etc. I don't really consider that type of crime in the same vein as what this fruitloop did though. Hell those two things, in my mind, aren't even on the same planet.

I honestly think most spree shooters- whether its a school or otherwise- are in that really f***ed up in the brain chemistry/wiring category, and the loserdom, desire for fame, and all that stuff just feeds into whatever their
internal malfunction is.

On the other hand- the instances of true full blooded, "clear thinking" sociopaths, IMHO are uncommonly rare. Someone like Anders Brevik, or Timothy McVeigh, people like that- are not in the same category as a typical
spree killer.

-Mike

I would compare it to a blown out tire. You could do a lot lot of different things and add controls and still its possible that one in a 10 million (so 30+ in the US?) is just going to blow out unexpectedly. You can follow all the best practice/guidance/wisdom and if it was messed up when it was made there is nothing you can do to mitigate it in the pure abstract legal sense. Its all about how to test for and (accurately) detect the malfunction.

I think this topic leads to a lot of restrictionists conflating one problem with another, and prescribing that the fix to some will address all but ignore the abstract costs of their ideas. Controlling it at the end of "We never could have known so just shut it off for everyone." is just lazy logic that is akin to saying if some demented freak is electrocuting puppies in his front yard we need to give up electricity to stop it.

 

[drgrant]

I would compare it to a blown out tire. You could do a lot lot of different things and add controls and still its possible that one in a 10 million (so 30+ in the US?) is just going to blow out unexpectedly. You can follow all the best practice/guidance/wisdom and if it was messed up when it was made there is nothing you can do to mitigate it in the pure abstract legal sense. Its all about how to test for and (accurately) detect the malfunction.

I think this topic leads to a lot of restrictionists conflating one problem with another, and prescribing that the fix to some will address all but ignore the abstract costs of their ideas. Controlling it at the end of "We never could have known so just shut it off for everyone." is just lazy logic that is akin to saying if some demented freak is electrocuting puppies in his front yard we need to give up electricity to stop it.

The fun thing is that the solution of increasing security of soft targets moves the bar to "high likelihood of stopping the problem" vs the gun prohibitionist thing, whatever it is, which is on a good day having only a shot in the dark chance likelihood of stopping the problem. (but everyone likes this because it "feels good" and makes some soft-skulled individuals happy, etc . )

The problem that lies within an MH DQ system is that- lets say it "worked" in the respect of stopping the kid from buying a gun at retail- that's cute that it worked, in
that one context; but what's to say that he's not just going to simply switch to a different weapon, or simply acquire a firearm on the black market, where 9000 lbs of "mental health disqualifiers" do jack shit to stop anyone from buying a gun at that level. You can even have a system which is well designed, pretty much non
infringing, etc, but it's not going to stop someone that simply decides to operate outside of the system.

That's like saying that people won't use Heroin because it's "more illegal".... lmao. Crack is like "illegal as hell" compared to even other drugs... and guess what... there's still people smoking crack! wow, amazing!

-Mike

 

[boiler_eng]

The fun thing is that the solution of increasing security of soft targets moves the bar to "high likelihood of stopping the problem" vs the gun prohibitionist thing, whatever it is, which is on a good day having only a shot in the dark chance likelihood of stopping the problem. (but everyone likes this because it "feels good" and makes some soft-skulled individuals happy, etc . )

The problem that lies within an MH DQ system is that- lets say it "worked" in the respect of stopping the kid from buying a gun at retail- that's cute that it worked, in
that one context; but what's to say that he's not just going to simply switch to a different weapon, or simply acquire a firearm on the black market, where 9000 lbs of "mental health disqualifiers" do jack shit to stop anyone from buying a gun at that level. You can even have a system which is well designed, pretty much non
infringing, etc, but it's not going to stop someone that simply decides to operate outside of the system.

That's like saying that people won't use Heroin because it's "more illegal".... lmao. Crack is like "illegal as hell" compared to even other drugs... and guess what... there's still people smoking crack! wow, amazing!

-Mike

Maybe it is my manufacturing mindset but I am just sitting here thinking, "You idiots are ignoring the production problem and focusing on the end point failure!". As you outlined if you cover one endpoint the problem just rolls onto the next failure/manifestation. Just as there are contributing factors to what causes someone to fall into a drug addiction, there are factors which contribute to or signal an issue that you need to catch before its too late, where too late isn't just that the person caused irreparable harm but also that they are just so gone that the only solution is isolation or elimination from society.

 

[MachineHead]

That CNN town fall was painful to see such stupidity on the part of the girl who had a question for Dana way before Dana even appeared. Then, the girl gets angry that her question wasn’t answered at that moment by someone who wasn’t even there. It was a total hit job. Dan Bongino should’ve been up there as well.

 

[meh]

If we harden the schools - and please don't misunderstand me - I don't think that's a bad idea at all - in fact I'm absolutely in favor of it - then we simply move the target elsewhere.

Yes, I've acknowledged this myself in other conversations on the subject. Even in the school setting, one can hardly expect armed teachers to save the day if the attack occurs outside the school when kids are let out.

Somehow this idea of shooting up the school has become embedded, whereas before it just wasn't there. Even though there had been deadly school attacks (e.g., Bath School Attack), it just wasn't something that occurred to people. It may not be possible to un-ring that bell, but some spectacularly embarrassing failures might be at least helpful. I dunno what to do. Put their pictures up on Billboards in their underwear?