The struggle for young gun rights for adults is the trend in America

I have a strong aversion to hypocrisy, which can remember as far as I can remind, and much further, I'm sure. Hand in hand with holiness, it is difficult to ignore, sometimes impossible to appear, and almost always before the narcissists' accusation for whom it is a basic tool in life.

So I like to step hypocrisy when it is below, I mean, it really looks over, especially when it comes to defending the second change application, because if you have read many of my articles, you know that suffering is not my strong suit. Today I concentrate on a topic that I have written several times recently, and that is the inequality of weapons rights that is used for young adults aged 18 to 20.

This incongruence has long existed, especially since the Weapons Control Act of 1968 (GCA) adult adults aged 18 to 20 years, to acquire a pistol via a Federal Firearms licensee (FFL). Uncontrolled hypocrisy, which led to more of the same as bad ideas tend to create worse, have many dumpstore fires that are still interested in the American states, doubles this nonsense and obliges the citizens to be 21 or older to buy a firearm.

However, this article is more about the good news, since trend decisions in court halls all over the country correct the course on this hypocrisy. I recently wrote about the governor of Iowa, Kim Reynolds, who signed a measure in the law that reduces ownership, possession and bearing permission in 18 to 18, like all other firearms sold in the state. I also wrote about the Supreme Court of the United States, which refused to hear Minnesota's appointment against a eighth circle Worth v. Jacobsonwho emphasizes the obligation of the state to provide evidence of a suitable historical analogue, which shows that the government can disarm people who threaten the security of itself and others, and ultimately the age limit in the light of the New York State Pistol & Rifle Association, Inc. v. Bruen.

“Minnesota has not shown that 18 to 20 year olds represent such a threat,” judge Duane Benton wrote in the decision of the eighth circuit.

But it does not end there because additional lawsuits have been submitted in other states that apply for judicial recognition of 18 to 20 year olds as “humans” whose right to keep and carry weapons. In February, Escher v. Noble was submitted in Massachusetts Young v. Ott before the US district court for the western district of Pennsylvania.

In January, the Court of Appeal of the Fifth Circle found that 18 USC §§ 922 (b) and (1) (1) (1) (1) to sell FFLS to sell handguns to 18 to 20 year olds, a violation of the second change that repeatedly determine the statutory review articles that determine young adults as “humans”, in order to be under the establishment of the second change through the second change.

Even Florida, a state that I would be happy to take into account under the constitutionally mindful lives, is in the damage protection mode, since the knee jerk legislation has returned to the state to pursue the state. In March, a stupid EN -Banc committee of the eleventh circuit 8 to 4 decided to maintain a state prohibition of firearms under the age of 21 in order to pull out the carpet of among them, the Attorney General James Uthmeier, General Prosecutor of Florida, who did not try to defend his office if the law would Championship contesting the contestation of the Supreme Court by the Supreme Court was further checked. This is an excellent strategy to undermine activists at the state and circular level that can support the support of the US general prosecutor Pam Bondi, who at the time, Florida AG, who ironically urged the law when it was originally enacted.

After my above-mentioned articles had been published about Iowa and Minnesota, I received a lot of news in which I really thought it was a good idea to enable 18 to 20 year olds to buy, own and wear firearms. My first answer is that it doesn't matter what I think. It is a natural right that is recognized by the Constitution of the United States as a founding principle of this nation. Second, I don't think this is the question we should ask. Instead, we have to ask ourselves where we, as adults, parents, communities, media and the government, deny when it comes to teaching the young people of America about our values ​​and responsibilities as a nation -resistant gun owner. Personally, I have my reservations when it comes to the latter two institutions, since I am confident that the media and the government have long been in Cahoots and that they do not take the coat of education and the obligation to change the second change, enjoyed them as a means of pursuing themselves.