A federal appeals court on Tuesday narrowly rejected a request from the National Rifle Association to rehear a case challenging the constitutionality of federal laws banning licensed firearms dealers from selling handguns to people younger than 21.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans rejected the request to hear the case before the full court on an 8-7 vote, one day after a three-judge panel upheld the laws as constitutional. All three judges on the panel that ruled Monday voted against rehearing the case.
The lawsuit, filed by several people from the ages of 18 to 20 at the time and the NRA against U.S.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in 2010, argues that the federal laws constitute “a significant, unequal, and impermissible burden on the right to keep and bear arms of a class of millions of law-abiding 18-to-20 year-old adult citizens.”
Later filings argue that the NRA’s licensed gun dealer members are harmed by the ban as well, since it prohibits them from making lawful handgun and ammunition sales to 18- to 20-year-olds.
Judge Prado, though, wrote that people who are at least 18 years old can own “long guns,” or rifles, can possess and use handguns, and can receive them as gifts from parents or guardians. He also cited federal statistics showing comparatively high crime rates among 18- to 20-year-olds, writing that since the ban was passed in 1968, “its objective has retained its reasonableness. The threat posed by 18-to-20-year-olds with easy access to handguns endures.”
"Endures" indeed. I don't see what good prohibiting teenagers from buying guns does if we allow them to own and use them.
What's your opinion? I think the minimum age for owning, using and buying any gun should be 25. Too often, younger people are not yet mature enough to handle the responsibility.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
