(08-04-2019 05:19 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(08-04-2019 04:08 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(08-04-2019 03:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Turning your question to a *real* question (the one that Tomball answered): what is the expected outcome of the proposed ban of all firearms from people less than 25 that you put forth? Why 25? Why not 45? Why not 75?

25 because the thought is that perhaps an 18-year-old isn't mature enough to handle the responsibilities of owning and handling a weapon that can kill dozens of people in a few minutes? Incomplete brain development, etc...

I guess the expected outcome is that there might be less mass shooters under the age of 25?

Most of us were likely a lot more hot-headed/prone to stupid and rash decisions when we were 18 as compared to age 26.

I would entertain an age limit for guns if you would support raising the voting age to 25. I don't think people who are "hot-headed/prone to stupid and rash decisions" should be selecting our leaders.

Or driving a car.

Or buying alcohol.

Or allowed in Wal-mart without adult supervision.

Lots of things I think should be restricted for people under 25. Maybe 35.

I got my first gun at 12. Damn sight more responsible with it at 12 than half the people in Chicago over 25 who are killing each other.

Lets ban abortions for anyone less than 25. I would unhesitatingly state that that kills far more than mass shooters.

Age based discrimination of basic Constitutional rights based on whim can be fun sport for both sides.