With the recent Memorial Day observance and the memory of the countless Americans who sacrificed their lives for freedom fresh in our minds, let’s talk about the first thing that’s likely to get thrown under the bus in the current gun owners’ civil rights controversy:  Americans 18 to 21 purchasing rifles.

I recently read “The Rifle,” written by a young veteran of the current conflict: Andrew Biggio, named after a forbear killed in Italy during World War II.  Seeing the Greatest Generation expiring from old age, he bought a rifle that symbolized their job at the time – the semiautomatic M-1 Garand, which fired an eight-round clip of .30-06 ammunition much more powerful than the 5.56mm round of today’s service rifle – and had it autographed by every WWII vet he could find.

When they signed the rifle, they told their stories, and Biggio recounts them movingly in the book.  He met one man who, in the Pacific campaign, was overrun by enemy soldiers in a banzai attack.  His Garand went empty, and the enemy was upon him before he could reload. He had to use the bayonet at the end of his M-1 to stop the man who was trying to kill him, and when the bayonet became stuck in the dead enemy’s body and he couldn’t pull it free, he had to draw a fighting knife from his belt scabbard and stab his next attacker to death with it.

(I bet he would have appreciated a weapon that could fire more than eight shots before reloading.)

Not every one of those fighting men used a Garand like the one they signed. They fought with grenades and flamethrowers and satchel charges that blew up reinforced pillboxes. They fought with heavy machine guns, light machine guns, and Browning Automatic Rifles. They fought with carbines and submachine guns and even with pistols. They dropped bombs from airplanes. 

And most of them weren’t much older than 18 when they signed up.

Many of their comrades weren’t yet 21 when they died for their country.

As I said in a recent interview after the Uvalde atrocity, if you’re old enough to die for your country with a government-issue machine gun in your hands, you’re old enough to be trusted with an AR15 semiautomatic rifle.

But that was only one of my take-aways from this memorable book. I’d like to hear your thoughts on the subject.

84 COMMENTS

  1. We live in a culture that treats adults as children, and treats children as disposable.–Ben Shapiro.

    • Didn’t 10 year olds captain Navy war ships back in the 1700s? Marry and start families?

      What is really going on is the left found a new excuse to curtail gun rights, and further erode the ability to own firearms. When a senior shoots up a school, they’ll demand that seniors be prohibited from owning. And so on, and so on.

      It’s not about crime, dead kids, or violence. It’s all about getting rid of guns for the average citizen, so only the leftists have guns. Just like with Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro, Chavez and the rest.

  2. So many of today’s youth grow up without ever being expected to shoulder responsibility. No summer break or after school jobs, often not even household responsibilities. They reach adulthood without the life skills or work ethic to deal with the real world.

    • I agree that could be part of it. However my active killer research has revealed the most common denominator of active killers that commit Rapid Mass Murder is their display of numerous unstable or troubling symptoms. The acronym NUTS(C) fits nicely and is appropriate usage for anyone to use.

      • But here is the problem.

        There are tens of thousands, maybe more, nuts out there who never commit violence. You can’t impinge the rights of tens of thousands when most will never cause problems.

        Only a tiny minority of people go off the deep end, and it’s very challenging, if not impossible, to identify those who will.

      • I heard another common denominator of many teenage mass murderers is their extensive use of marijuana. Pot heads don’t want to hear this, so it’s seldom reported or even covered up in the liberal media.

      • There are tens of thousands, maybe more, nuts out there who never commit violence. You can’t impinge the rights of tens of thousands when most will never cause problems.
        There are lots of mentally ill people who never commit violence. True.
        But driving around shooting at random people with a BB gun, and killing cats and posing with sacks of the bloody remains is not “never committing violence.”

  3. If there is one thing I think several generations have learned is watch out for in your ear. The media and sinister forces want to keep the people distracted while they pull some strings that are hidden. This agenda of disarmament is nothing new and history made it very clear. Pol Pot, Khmer Rouge, Hitler, Stalin.
    1911: Turkey; citizens disarmed – 1.5 million Armenians were slaughtered
    1929: Russia; citizens disarmed – 20 million Russians murdered
    1935: China; citizens disarmed – 20 million Chinese killed
    1938: Germany; citizens disarmed – 6 million Jews murdered
    1956: Cambodia; citizens disarmed – 1 million “intellectuals” killed
    1964: Guatemala; citizens disarmed – 100,000 Mayan Indians massacred
    1970: Uganda; citizens disarmed – 300,000 Christians put to death
    Adolph Hitler famously said, “To conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens.”
    Recently, Canadian gun rights activist, Bruce Montague told Rebel media that when he first became aware that the government wanted to disarm law abiding citizens he realized that the government did not trust law-abiding citizens. “And when the government does not trust decent people with guns,” he said, “Decent people can no longer trust their government.”
    https://foac-pac.org/images/header-text.png

    • Jocko Willink reported that if attackers go up against a trained, ensconced defender, it’s likely that 4 – 10 of the attackers will die before the defender does.

      The government knows how threatening armed people are to evil people with nefarious intent. It’s why they are so obsessed with disarming us at every turn.

      And don’t forget Rwanda, Cuba, Venezuela, and the American Indians.

  4. I bet the Germans and Japanese wished they had a rifle that fired more than 5 shots before reloading and didn’t have to manually manipulate a bolt for each shot!

    It’s all relative.

    I have a 1917, M1 Garand, and M1 Carbine, all three full stock GI. Love ’em all!

    For the period of WW2 the Garand and Carbine were THE guns… top of the line!

    Thank God, Garand, Ed Browning & Carbine Williams, and others we had them!

  5. An excellent book for sure. If you are infantry, it is amazing the attachment you get to your rifle. For my grandfather it was the 1903, for my father the M1, for me the M16A1. Despite shooting and training with other weapons, the one you went through Basic with tends to be a favorite. As for the Democrats, don’t for one minute think they’ll be satisfied with age 21 & 15 rounds. Next it will be age 25, 30, 10 rounds, 5 rounds….

    • No rounds.

      They have admitted it. They want complete gun control. And any government person who demands any spec of gun control needs to be removed from office in a non-violent, legal fashion.

      No exceptions.

  6. Note to politicians: Either make the age of majority 21 across the board, or end the continued discrimination against 18-20 year-olds. The Bill of Rights wasn’t a suggestion.

    • YES!!!
      As the father of a son in the Infantry (a Combat Engineer Sapper) whose said son enlisted at age 17 and has faithfully served this Country for nearly ten years now, I again write, YES!!!!!!!!!!!!

  7. I have read that the average age of WW II service men & women was 19. The people who can’t be trusted with any kind of weapon (including language) seem to be those of extremist political persuasion. I was one of the first 18 yr olds to vote in a Presidential election. Good luck taking away any of those rights enshrined in the US Bill of Rights.

  8. Beginning to have my doubts.

    When 38% of the voting population (52% of Dems, 25% of Repubs, and 36% of Independents) say they would abandon the U.S. if war was to be within the US, what percentage of those are younger/woke ? Just think about todays indoctrination.
    How many of the younger population have any background or training with firearms like we did ?
    I’m thinking that 21 my not be all that bad, unless you show a current military ID.
    18 may be military eligible, but how many do ?

  9. Sergeant York and Audie Murphy both learned marksmanship and gun handling as kids. If they didn’t, we likely would have never heard of them. Everyone should know how to defend themselves. An iPhone video and a 911 call is not enough to save your life or the lives of others.

  10. I agree with you Mas, any Mass shootings are atrocities, especially when children are involved. However, the blame is completely on the individual who has committed the crime. We don’t need more gun control, we need to have more education in the handling and responsibilities involved with the use and ownership of guns. If government wants to get to the solution for these shootings, more mental health issues and problems need to be found. Individuals capable of committing such crimes will find other means such as vehicles, hammers or any one of numerous deadly weapons to accomplish their evil crimes.

    • I think the blame should also be on the media for ginning up hatred, rage, discontent and divisiveness. Now they are separating us into Vaxxed and unvaxxed. It never ends.

  11. I totally agree I was 17 when I went in the Navy and qualified with the 1911 in boot camp and when I got to the fleet if they wanted to arm a sailor they gave you a weapon in my case for repelling boaders if the situation ever arose I was issued a 12 gauge pump others were issued everything from Thompsons to BARs to M-14s this was when we were off the coast of Nam.

  12. You know I rarely disagree with you about all thing’s guns, but I must respectfully disagree with you regarding the age issue.
    Though an admirable story you referenced, boys/men were a whole different breed of cat back then. If they were not raised up learning about responsible gun safety and use, then they learned it when they were either drafted or they voluntarily enlisted in the military when going through the rigors of boot camp.
    Young men this day and age unless they were raised by responsible gun owning parents/relatives, they learned about guns most likely playing a video game and they lack the mental capacity to really understand the awesome responsibility that comes with a real gun.
    The adage of “if you’re old enough to die for your country with a government-issue machine gun in your hands, you’re old enough to be trusted with an AR15 semiautomatic rifle.” just doesn’t cut it anymore.
    Most people will leave the military after their 3-4 year bid and will be 21-22 years old, have had weapons training and understand the awesome damage that firearms can inflict as well as being more emotionally mature. The they want to go out and by an AR-15 then? Knock themselves out.
    There has to be some changes made as the old way just isn’t working.
    I would like to see prominent folks in the gun industry (such as yourself) present solutions to this obvious problem instead of trotting out old adages that may have been relevant decades ago but no longer apply in our current society.
    Be part of a solution that all can live with and agree upon. As responsible gun owners we need to step up. If we don’t budge a little, I fear we will then lose a lot.

    Personally, I have no problem with the age to buy a semi-automatic rifle (AR-15) being raised to 21.

    FROM ATF:
    “All firearms other than shotguns and rifles, and all ammunition other than ammunition for shotguns or rifles may be sold only to individuals 21 years of age or older.”

    So, an 18 year old can’t go out and buy a semi-automatic pistol or ammo but they can go out and buy a semi-automatic rifle and ammo? Sorry but that makes no sense at all.

    • Linda,

      Thanks for commenting, but I respectfully disagree. There is no “solution” to preventing what the Left calls “gun violence.” Laws do not restrain evil minds. A determined criminal will get a weapon somehow, and use it to harm others. When that happens, the correct thing to do is to mount an explosive counter-attack. In other words, when a criminal begins shooting, the victims need to shoot back accurately, powerfully, and quickly. If enough “mass shootings” are stopped quickly, and the perpetrators die, that will convince semi-sane, would-be criminals that attacking people equals a swift death. At that point, only the super-determined, insane criminals will attack us.

      Many years ago there were bumper stickers which read, “Fight Crime. Shoot Back.”

    • As the father of a Son who:
      • Enlisted in the US Army at age 17, and has served his country for nearly ten years now protecting our freedoms, including in your case, the freedom to be foolish
      • Is an Infantry Soldier and Combat Engineer / Sapper, currently deployed to a place I cannot share, again, risking his life for your freedoms, including your freedom to be irrational
      • Continues to serve his country on the other side of the planet away from his beloved wife and two children
      I find your opinions to be lacking. And in choosing the word “lacking” I am being charitable.
      Regarding your last sentence, you are right – it “makes no sense at all”. Because anyone who this country is willing to recruit to DIE for this country, in addition to being able to purchase a semi-automatic rifle and the ammunition for it, should most certainly be able to buy a semi-automatic pistol and the ammunition for it as well to protect him or her self and his or her loved ones.

      I consider hypocritical people like you to be a disease. I hope you come to your senses.

      • Frankly, I consider your response offensive and insulting. You don’t know crap about me or my background, yet you have no problem slinging insults. Apparently, you didn’t bother to really read what I wrote but cherrypicked comments you felt justified jumping on your little box and attacking me.
        People like you bring nothing to the table but bitching and complaining.
        Your insulting negativity just acerbates the issue. If you have no viable solutions to offer, kindly take a seat and zip it.

    • My parents were not gun people. Never had them in the house, yet I was always interested in them. Probably from reading the Boy Scout Magazine, Boy’s Life (which today, thanks to snowflake idiots) has no gun ads in it at all). Crossman, Daisy, Remington, Winchester, Marlin all had ads there. I read about them in books from the library, and then found friends who had them who were generous enough to talk to me, and take me to the sand pit where I could shoot their guns.

      And John. Go easy. Linda has a different perspective, and different lived experiences than you and me. As a result, she believes different things. Attacking her, and getting snitty does not make her more willing to listen, open her mind, and contemplate other ideas. It just makes people defensive, angry, and more closed minded.

  13. I have a hard time taking away constitutional rights from any adult in the United States w/o just cause, but I will admit that today’s 18 year olds are not the same young men as those who answered the call to duty back in the 1940’s.

    • You haven’t met my son. He’s currently risking his life to protect your freedom to spew nonsense. And he enlisted to do that at age 17, he started doing that at age 18 and he continues to do that on the other side of the planet, missing time with his beloved wife and children. Think before you write.

  14. Growing up on a farm in South Dakota I received a .22 rifle for my 12th birthday i used it to reduce the gopher population and I also received a 12 gauge single shot from an uncle that thought I was old enough for it, but that was the norm when I grew up now my 12 year old grandson took an 8 point buck last November with a .243 I gave e him for his 11th birthday and his 7 year old brother says he wants my 30.06 when he’s older.

    • Gary Richardt,

      Sounds like a well-adjusted family, a rarity. Maybe only the Amish have those now-a-days.

      American culture is poison, and public school is child abuse.

  15. I wonder if those who are so willing to raise the age of firearms ownership would be willing to raise the legal age limit of military enlistment and, further still, raise the legal age limit for voting? For that matter, would the entire Bill of Rights only apply to those who are 21 and over in their vision of society in the future? I wonder.

    • Thank you for your intelligent, rational thoughts. I agree wholeheartedly. And so would my son who is currently deployed on the other side of the planet, protecting your freedom to write rational thoughts as well as the freedoms of others to write nonsense in regard to this subject, something he enlisted to do at age 17, started doing at age 18, and continues to do nearly ten years later. Again, thank you.

    • Aren’t leftists clamoring for 16 year olds to vote? How is a 16 year old mature enough to vote, but not mature enough to drink, join the military, or buy a gun?

      Another piece of evidence that progressives are looking for any excuse to further gun control in the US.

      • Emmett,

        Agreed. Also, teenagers used to get married, successfully. Whether you look at marriage and procreation from a biblical perspective, or from an evolutionary/naturalistic perspective, if a person can procreate, they can marry. In our culture we delay marriage and procreation in order to focus on schooling, certification and making enough money to join the middle class. From a biblical or an evolutionary standpoint, it could be argued that our way of doing things is artificial and unnatural.

  16. Here enemy we face on gun control companies supporting gun control.

    CEOs from more than 200 companies including Levi Strauss, Lululemon urge Senate to pass gun safety legislation
    Brett Molina, USA TODAY

    Chief executives from more than 200 companies have sent a letter to the U.S. Senate urging lawmakers to pass gun safety legislation.

    The letter, signed by CEOs from companies including DoorDash, Levi Strauss, Lululemon Athletica and Unilever, pushes senators to “work together to pass bold legislation” to address gun violence.

    Turn Your Rising Home Equity Into Cash You Can Use
    Ad
    LendingTree
    Turn Your Rising Home Equity Into Cash You Can Use
    “Like you, we continue to bear witness to the toll of America’s gun violence epidemic and its impact on our communities,” the letter reads. “Our country needs you to take bold urgent action to address our gun violence epidemic.”

    Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.

    CEOs from dozens of companies wrote a similar letter in 2019 imploring legislators pass bills to address gun safety, citing mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio; El Paso, Texas, and West Texas. It’s been 2 weeks since the Rob Elementary school shooting and Uvalde

    How lawmakers are working toward possible gun reform
    Unmute
    0
    More product shortages: We’ve had baby formula and toilet paper shortages. Now tampons are getting hard to find

    In 2019, several retailers including Walmart, Kroger, CVS and Walgreens have asked customers not to openly carry guns in stores. Walmart also said it would stop selling ammunition for assault-style weapons and handguns.

    The letter released Thursday comes after a mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, at an elementary school that left 19 children and two teachers dead. On Wednesday, survivors of mass shootings testified before lawmakers in support of gun safety legislation.

    The House voted on a bill raising the minimum age to buy semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21. The bill heads to the Senate but is not expected to pass.

    • Although I don’t think it should be illegal, carrying a gun where anyone can see it is the height of stupidity. It’s one thing if you live in rural Vermont, where seeing a gun openly carried is no big deal, but the left has made people think that anyone with a gun is an insane terrorist /criminal. Exposing a gun to the public scares the horses, and likely will result in armed police officers taking notice of you. Being around armed police is dangerous in this day and age for all of the obvious reasons. They are on hair trigger edges because of all the publicity and pressure about mass shootings.

      My gun stays concealed, and I don’t even talk about it with friends, family, neighbors or co-workers.

  17. Audie Murphy was only 19 when he earned the Congressional Medal of Honor in World War II.

  18. Amen. Either they are too young to serve or old enough to own an AR 15.

    But we need a serious investment in mental health in this country. A way for us to reach our troubled youth before they decide death in infamy is a better option than life in simple obscurity.

  19. Contrariwise: if one is NOT mature enough to possess a rifle at age 18, neither is one mature enough to enter into contracts, nor give consent for their own medical treatmrnts, nor to vote.

    If we are sincere, let’s be consistent.

  20. Contrariwise: if one is NOT mature enough to purchase a rifle at age 18, neither is one mature enough to enter into contracts, nor give consent for their own medical treatments, nor to vote.

    If we are sincere, let’s be consistent.

  21. Here’s my opinion: If Congress does take away the Second Amendment rights of persons aged 18 to 20, then those persons should also be exempt from military service, from the draft (if it is ever reinstated), and draft registration. They can’t have it both ways. But what will they do for cannon fodder?

  22. The hypocrisy of insisting that young Americans can be conscripted, fight and die at 18 yet cannot be trusted to purchase a semiautomatic version of the rifle they are issued unless they are 21 is an abomination. Uvalde was a total fail when it shouldn’t have been after all these years of supposedly hardening our schools. An 18 year old devil does not negate the valor of all 18 year old who have and do protect this country or simply leave descent lives.

  23. This is true to me, so many younger kids have been trusted with rifles. And so much more, and the thought Ted Cruz gets criticized after he explained his bill would prevented this school shooting.

  24. Yes!! If you are 18 and old enough to vote, old enough to join the military and die for your country, old enough to be considered an adult in a court of law, then you are absolutely old enough to own an AR-15 type rifle!

  25. The fact that people, in the 18 to 21 year-old range can fight and die for our country, is beside-the-point for the firearms-prohibitionists.

    The current attack on that age group is as simple as this:

    1) The gun-grabbers will attack ANY segment of the firearms market or ANY set of gun-owners that appear vulnerable. They know that they can’t (yet) push for total disarmament of the American Citizen. So, they settle for incremental disarmament of any vulnerable group.

    2) In two (2) recent, high-profile mass-murder incidents (Texas and NY), the murderers happened to fall inside this 18 to 21 year-old age window. This gives the prohibitionists, and their media attack dogs, an opening to craft a narrative claiming that ALL member of that age group are potentially unstable and ought to be denied their 2nd Amendment Rights. These incidents make them vulnerable in the eyes of the gun-grabbers. They see an opening to buffalo the public and politicians into passing new restrictions.

    3) Smelling blood in the water, the leftist sharks move to attack. From their point-of-view, it is in their long-term interest to prevent young people from developing any knowledge or skill with firearms and to indoctrinate them into being scared of them. Remember, fear and fear-mongering is the Left’s primary weapon-of-choice.

    4) Therefore, disarming this age group is one incremental step (along with attacks on semi-automatic rifles and a new push for Red Flag Laws), that seems available to the anti-gunners in light of the recent high-profile murders.

    As I noted before, the firearms-prohibitionists are indiscriminate. They, literally, don’t care where they attack. Instead, they attack whenever and where ever they see an opening. They attack any area that seems weak and vulnerable. Their technique is universal disarmament by means of a thousand small incremental steps.

    The Left is in this fight for the long-term. Even if it takes them a century to disarm the American People, they will slog on until it is done. Why not? The reward is rich. Once disarmed, the American People will be their helpless slaves. The people can be robbed and exploited without end.

    The Left preaches that they are fighting for “Social Justice” and for “The People”. However, that is just propaganda designed to mislead the sheep and useful idiots among us.

    The true utopia of the Left is what they currently have in China. There, the top 1% of the population (the leftist leadership) rules and the remaining 99% of the population is helpless serfs to the all-powerful State.

    Don’t be fooled. When Obama spoke about “Transforming America”, this was what he really meant. Transforming the Old American Republic, wherein the People had power, into a Leftist slave State based upon an Americanized version of the China Model.

    Anyone, who is capable of critical thinking and who is not brainwashed by the indoctrination and propaganda of the American Left, can look around and see the slave State rising all around us today.

    So, with respect to Mas’ reasoned arguments about the Rights of people in the 18 to 21 year-old age group, he is missing the point as far as the gun-grabbers are concerned. They care NOTHING for such counter-arguments. They are simply attacking this age group because they see an opening to do so. No other reason.

  26. Agree with this logic. But now we seem to be infested with psychopaths: where did they come from? Until you can figure that out and keep them away from guns, the military logic won’t work.

  27. Mas,
    Many thanks for the insight. You are absolutely correct.
    Appreciate the reference to the book. I am a history buff and I competed in NRA High Power Rifle with a Garand, so it is close to my heart.
    I ordered it and can’t wait to read it.

  28. I’m not sure why it’s OK for kids to change their sex and get an abortion under age 18, but defending themselves with a firearm is a big no-no.

    Actually, I know why. Leftism has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with upheaving the culture to gain maximum control. But I don’t why more Americans aren’t ticked off about how this country is being flushed down the toilet. This country was founded by those fleeing tyranny. Now it is running right back into its arms.

    • Colonel Travis,

      King George the III would certainly make a better President than any Democrat. He would tax us at 3%, not 30%.

      • Roger:

        Come on, Man! That 30% tax is a result of inflation obviously caused by the diabolical Donald Trump and his good evil buddy, Vladimir “Raz” Putin. If only crazy conservatives would become more sensible and non-partisan, they would support Crooked Joe’s Build Back Better and Green New Deal schemes, which would immediately reduce the inflation rate to zero and usher in the prosperous New World Order.

    • Yes. I used to manage a district office for a member of the House of Representatives. Trust me, a pile of letters (back when people wrote letters) got his attention. People need to do this.

      I’m in Texas. Not worried about Cruz but I’ve emailed useless Cornyn.

  30. The recently-released FBI report on “active shooters” in 2021 shows that 2/3 of perpetrators were over 24 years old. (It didn’t break it down within the 18-24 year old group.) Seems that the notion that “most” mass shootings are by under-21’s is not rooted in fact. The group with the largest representation was 25-34 year-olds.
    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-incidents-in-the-us-2021-052422.pdf/view
    This is a small, selective sample (61 incidents, lots of caveats on what was excluded, like gangs) from one year, but it serves to illustrate a problem with this simplistic “solution.”

      • If the average shooter age is 18, it means some are not 18 (I can think of two 17-year-olds off the top of my head – Columbine and Santa Fe, Texas – and I can think of one 16-year-old in Minnesota). Looking at the database from your link, I also see a 13-year-old, a 14-year-old and a 15-year-old. I believe that is everyone under age 18 on that list, which accounts for almost half the mass shootings at schools, according to your link. 13 mass shootings at schools in 33 years, according to them. Six involved shooters under the age of 18.

        Not one of those six kids should have been able to possess any firearm, period. Forget about buying one. Yet they still got their hands on them.

        How many millions of 18-year-olds were not involved in a school mass shooting in the past 33 years? Pretty much all of them.

      • Colonel Travis,

        You made good points. The fact that even minors can get their hands on guns reminds me of a point one commentator made here months ago. He wrote that illegal drugs cannot be kept out of prisons. How can we keep bad people from getting guns? Can’t be done. No sense in writing laws for the lawless.

  31. Mas: As you know, the 2A begins: “A well regulated Militia, . . ..” That phrase is often ignored. But SCOTUS has defined it. The Militia is composed of “. . . all people: the body of the public—the people—were required to keep a centralized government in check.” D.C. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) And well regulated as “… the imposition of discipline and training.” U.S. V. Miller 307 U.S. 174 (1939) To me, being part of a well regulated militia means having been examined by authorities and found sufficiently intelligent and sane, sworn an oath to protect the Constitution, trained, under the authority of rules of engagement, and held responsible. Thorough back ground checks, red flag laws, waiting periods, and required training would all be consistent and therefore constitutional.

  32. @ Bill Groover – “As you know, the 2A begins: ‘A well regulated Militia, . . ..’ ”

    And it ends with the declarative statement that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.

    None of our other fundamental rights are subjected to the infringements (background checks, red flag laws, waiting periods, required training, etc.) that you suggest. Why do you accept such infringements so easily for the 2nd Amendment?

    It is part of a pattern, it seems. Although the 2A is part of the original Bill of Rights, it is routinely treated as if it does not belong there. As if it is not a right at all but, instead, is a government-issued privilege.

    In my view, the 2A is due the same respect given to the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments. IMHO, any infringements of the 2A, to be constitutional, should pass muster under “strict scrutiny”. I believe that the SCOTUS has also defined this term:

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutiny

    I don’t believe the infringements that you listed would pass muster if subjected to a “strict scrutiny” review. They don’t pass muster with me either!

  33. A group of Anti-2A companies has written a letter to congress demanding curtailment of our 2A Rights. Very conveniently, they have compiled themselves into a list of “Enemies of the American people”. Here is the link:

    https://www.axios.com/2022/06/09/ceos-senate-gun-legislation-letter

    I don’t recognize most of the companies on the list. Most seem to be “small-time” players. Hopefully, this action will hurt them and they will grow even smaller. Here is the link to this list of traitors:

    https://www.axios.com/2022/06/09/ceos-senate-gun-legislation-letter

    However, I do recognize some of the companies. They comprise “The Usual Suspects”:

    Autodesk
    Bloomberg, LP (of course!)
    Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream (of course!)
    Credit Karma
    Dick’s Sporting Goods (of Course!)
    Levi Stauss & Co. (Of Course!)

    I would suggest an immediate “cease and desist” policy for doing business with any company on this list of Anti-American businesses. If they can argue for the curtailment of my Rights, then they can very well do without my business!

  34. A “well-regulated Militia” can refer to a group of citizen-soldiers who shoot accurately.
    Also, these days I prefer a combat rifle in .30-06 for the ability to penetrate high-level body armor, even using surplus military full metal jacket ammo, let alone modern ammo with a tungsten core. Any up-to-date foreign army will be coming at us wearing state-of-the-art ballistic protection.
    By the way, let’s close the borders. The mortality ratio for monkey pox is reported to run about four times that of COVID 19.

  35. come on guys and gals, stop the TV and Movies knowledge about firearms. High schools used to have rifle teams, 22’s and taught firearm safety. Now it’s transgender info and how to go about sex changes. The military concern is how to get trans gender medication on to the battle field, really,? Fellows ask me, “what can I do” ?, my answers are join the PTA’s, School boards,
    Boy Scout programs, teach what you know, and how to respect firearms. What we are lacking
    is the American family, and male adult leadership. Study, not just look at “gun violence ” and
    see the lack of adult responsibility, including Law Enforcement, and school administrators,
    that allow these young men to just keep on, keep on. But what do I know,?

  36. TN_MAN If the “necessity of a well regulated militia” doesn’t mean anything like what I’m saying, what does it mean?

  37. As a member of the boomer generation, I have to admit that many of my cohort failed to properly raise and socialize our children. And, those children have reproduced. However, the absurdity of banning a specific firearm while enabling the same group (or younger!) to vote is self evident. At least if you actually use your brain.

    Tongue in cheek: perhaps a suitability test prior to purchase. Put the prospective purchaser in a room with a firearm in it and observe behavior. If they immediately clear the firearm and then put it down, approve to purchase.

  38. According to ammoland.com/2… the USA abandoned $83 billion’s worth of war materiel. That includes over 600,000 small arms, including hundreds of thousands of M-16s. And what could be called a mountain of ballistic vests. That many small arms can easily outfit about 40 DIVISIONS of enemy troops. How many divisions would we have without our rifles. Not enough to stop a herd of rabbits. We just better call a halt to uncontrolled immigration now, as legally as possible. A military invasion supported by EMP can sweep over us like the Great Flood.

    • Don’t sweat it, Man! Those 600,000 guns, thousands of NVGs and tons of ammo are now in the hands of the Taliban, who are devout followers of Islam, the “Religion of Peace” according to liberals. Those peaceful guys only use their weapons to fight oppression, not to shoot up schools, churches, food stores, and movie theaters like vicious Americans.

  39. If they are servicemembers or veterans under 21 that’s fine, ie they have been trained with firearms and passed training requiring self-discipline. If not, given the known lack of brain development in young adults, the aggrandizing of the AR and AK platforms in violent games and movies and the lack of hardened schools and recent poor performing LEOs, I have no problem with 21 for semi-auto long guns as well as pistols. Just my .02 as a retired soldier and retired LEO.

    • John Fowler,

      I respectfully disagree. What you write sounds reasonable, but I am tired of trying to go along to get along with the Left. I don’t want to budge another inch.

      The nation has had two recent high-profile shootings; one in Buffalo, NY and one in Uvalde, TX. Because of these two horrible crimes, the Left thinks its a good time to introduce more anti-gun, anti-citizen legislation. For that very reason I don’t want to hear any talk of changing any laws. This is a time to stand firm, and not give ground.

      The media will accuse our side of not wanting to solve the “gun violence problem” because we don’t want any new laws. Too bad. Take the smears and still don’t give an inch of ground to their side. No more giving in to their demands.

      I am against changing any gun laws at this time. Even if I favored a change in the gun laws, I would not introduce it at this time, just because the enemy is introducing it now.

      I used to believe the other side was mistaken. Now I believe they are evil.

      • Roger, you are right. The liberals on The Dark Side don’t care about the safety of others. They just want to rule over us lowly peasants and deprive us of weapons to defend ourselves against their brutal regime.

        As I’ve said before, “Liberals are stupid or evil”. Some like Crooked Joe can be both.

  40. @ TN_MAN – What do you believe the Founding Fathers meant by ‘A well regulated Militia, . . .’?

    • @ Bill Groover – Please define “well regulated militia” as used in the 2nd Amendment (2A).

      At the time the 2A was written, the U.S. did not have a large standing army or a National Guard. These developed later and, perhaps, would have been frowned upon by the Founding Fathers. From their writings, they distrusted keeping a “large, standing army” since it could be used, by a tyrant, to oppress the People.

      Rather, the army consisted of a relatively small core of professional soldiers. The main U.S. defensive force consisted of militia troops. Militia, to the Founding Fathers, meant troops drawn from the general, able-bodied male population. It did not mean regular troops as part of a “standing army”.

      Militia units were used heavily during the Revolutionary War. Consider the Battle of Cowpens, for example. See this link:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cowpens

      The troops available to the U.S. commander, General Morgan, largely consisted of militia although he did have a core of “Regulars”. The quality of General Morgan’s militia varied. Some were experienced and “battle-hardened”. Some were still “green”.

      During the war, green militia troops had broken and ran, time after time, when facing regular British Troops. As a result, the British had a poor opinion of our militia. General Morgan decided to use this weakness to his advantage. As they say, to “make lemonade out of these lemons”!

      He arranged a defense-in-depth for the Battle of Cowpens. He placed marksmen and relatively green militia in his front lines at the center. This invited the British to attack there. He told these militia units to “fire two shots” and then march to the rear and re-form behind the line of his regular troops and experience militia. They followed their orders.

      The British saw them withdraw and assumed that they were running again. This lured the British into a foolish charge into the center. In effect, they charged into a pocket wherein they could be surrounded and cut to pieces. Which is what happened.

      The Battle of Cowpens was a notable VICTORY for the Americans.

      This history was not lost upon the Founding Fathers. They knew that, if they based the security of the U.S. upon militia forces, these militia needed to be organized and disciplined units not “green” militia that would break and run at the first shot!

      So, this is what they meant by a “well regulated militia”. They meant “not green and untrained” but, rather, organized, under discipline, and with some training. Nevertheless, still consisting of troops drawn from the general population.

      If I were to re-write the 2A, to remove ambiguity over this point, I would re-phrase it as:

      “The ultimate National Security of the United States depends upon militia drawn from the general population of able-bodied, law-abiding, adult Citizens. The ultimate security of the people against crime and violence also depends upon the actions of law-abiding Citizens. To provide this security, all law-abiding Citizens require instant access to small-arms. Therefore, no branch of the Federal Government, no State Government, and no territorial Government shall have the power to disarm the law-abiding Citizens of the United States nor shall they pass onerous or restrictive laws, or regulations, to limit the access of Citizens to small-arms. The Right of the Citizens of the United States to obtain, purchase, possess, and carry small-arms, for their common defense, shall not be infringed.”

      • @ TN_man – Your desire to rewrite the 2A doesn’t improve on the original. You have given us a good “wide brush” painting of the militia and political climate during the Constitutional Covention. Allow me to add some names. Virtually all Founding Fathers were afraid of a strong central government. They were the Federalists. Another group, the Anti-Federalists were even more afraid. They could foresee a congress that would have the power to create new agencies that could make its own laws, have its own courts, and have its own standing army. FBI, IRS, CIA, ring any bells? Many Anti-Federalists would not sign the Constitution until the Bill of Rights was included Samule Adams, George Manson, Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry, and John Hancock (who clearly did sign the Constitution). Most Anti-Federalists were also abolitionist-compromisers. As to the militia, the most famous were Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys and Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox, who was critical at Yourtown. And the Cherokee Repellers. No history books I know of, but my great-great grandfater and his brother drilled with them.

        Nonetheless, I hear significant overlap in our positions: (militia) drawn from the general population of able-bodied (able-minded?) law-abiding, adult (21+?) Citizens. . . . also depends upon the actions of (well trained) law-abiding Citizens. . . . (and) instant access to small-arms.” I’m not an NRA member, nor will I be and give them $1 as long as they’re paying Wayne LaPierre $2million +, so I can’t speak as an insider. But no body I know of is stronger on gun safety, training, responsibility, and patriotism. I do not remember any news story of a mass murdere turning out to be an NRA member, and i’m sure if they found that stroy they’s wasn to embarass the NRA and silence it by making the most of the story.

      • In other words, the militia of the 1700’s was American men of fighting age who are willing to defend their country. I would be fair and include women in that group too.

      • Bill Groover,

        You are knowledgeable. Here is why you should join the NRA, and all gun groups. Without the NRA, we would have lost our Second Amendment rights by now, or even in the 1970s. The Second Amendment would be cancelled or legislated away without the NRA and other gun groups.

        New Jersey has already lost half of the 2A. We are not allowed to carry our guns, “bear them,” outside our homes. Our magazines are limited to 10 rounds. The United Kingdom, Australia and Canada do not have the NRA, and it shows. They have lost their rights, at least partially, like handguns. Switzerland has great gun laws, except you can’t carry them concealed.

        Also, if we really followed the 2A today, we would all serve in militias. So, that part of the right has been lost, except for a few militias. I want to join a militia, but I don’t want to get on the government’s radar any more than I already am.

        There is no such thing as bad ice cream, and there is no such thing as a bad gun group composed of law-abiding citizens. The perfect is the enemy of the good.

      • @ Bill Groover – The chief weak-point, with the original 2A, is its two part structure. it consists of an opening explanation (or reason) phrase followed by a declarative phrase that details the desired action. This structure is common in the English language.

        For example, suppose I took my computer to a repair shop and told the repair technician the following statement:

        “My computer is acting strange, please check it for virus or malware infection.”

        The opening phrase just provides background information. It tells the technician that I have noticed unusual (strange) computer operating patterns. The second part is the operative (action) phrase. It specifically requests that the computer be checked for virus/malware infection.

        If the technician focused simply on the explanatory phrase, he would misunderstand the action desired. In other words, he might run a battery of diagnostic tests in an effort to track down the reported “strange” behavior.

        This would be wrong and a misunderstanding. The requested action was to specifically check for virus/malware infection. Not to run a battery of diagnostic tests. Why would the technician misunderstand? Perhaps he is stupid or does not understand the English language well. Or, more insidiously, perhaps he deliberately chose to misunderstand because running a complete diagnostic series would allow him to bill more hours and increase his labor charge!

        The American Left is like that. They willfully focus on the explanatory phrase of the 2A (“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,”) because, by doing so, they can set up a false narrative that the 2A only deals with regulating militia forces, and deliberately ignore the operative phrase of the 2A (“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”).

        It would seem that the American Left “can’t understand English so good”! At least, when it comes to reading the 2A correctly! 🙂

        My re-written version tries to remove opportunities for “wilful” misunderstanding of the meaning of the 2A. It tries to draw clear limits such as:

        Citizen – Limits the 2A to apply to U.S. Citizens thereby restricting its applicability to illegal aliens and foreign nationals.

        Adults – Limits the 2A to adults. Since the link is made to militia service, the same age limit should apply for consistency. For example, if 18 year olds are legal for militia service, then they are legal for 2A rights. If the desire exists to limit 2A rights to the age of 21, then militia and military service age should begin at 21. I disapprove of double-standards.

        Able-Bodied – For militia service, a fairly high level is required. For private service in self-defense against crime, a lower level can be allowed. Nevertheless, the brain is an organ of the body so sanity (good mental health) is always required. Even for a private citizen, there are also physical limits. Someone who is completely blind or paralyzed and unable to handle a firearm would be restricted.

        Law-Abiding – Would exclude citizens with a felony criminal history. Probably, a history of violent domestic abuse would also be reasonable grounds for limiting 2A rights.

        Small-Arms – Limits the 2A to small arms (arms carried and used by a single individual). Would exclude crew served weapon systems, explosives (nuclear or conventional), or other such high-end military weapon systems. However, IMHO, many of the NFA restrictions should be removed (suppressors, short barrelled rifles or shotguns, etc.). I think restricting suppressors is truly counter-productive and stupid.

        So, yes, I don’t see the 2A as an unlimited right. However, I think our current laws are infringing upon it already and don’t support any further restrictions. I would roll back a lot of the useless regulations that we already have and pare down the thousands of “gun laws”, already on the books, to just those that would pass a serious (strict scrutiny) review and which would actually be effective against crime.

  41. Quote of the Day:

    “We must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig. Cow after cow. Village after village. Army after army, and they call me an assassin! Well, what do you call it when the assassins accuse the assassin?

    They lie. They lie, and we have to be merciful, for those who lie. Those nabobs. I hate them. I do hate them.”

    Colonel Walter E. Kurtz – From the movie “Apocalypse Now”

    • As far as the left, gun-grabbers, and illegal immigrants, I like the old football cheer: “Push ‘em back, push ‘em back, waaay back!” And Let’s Go Brandon!!

  43. Notice how the police can be defunded, but the government cannot be defunded. It can’t even have its spending levels frozen.

  44. Errata to my last post:
    George Mason, not Manson.
    “. . . instant access to small arms.” My first thought was instant means I can grab my Glock and go. You may have mean instantly buy more weapons without a waiting period. I will compromise on reasonable waiting periods but nothing like the possible year long wait for a supressor license.

  45. @ TN_MAN – I guessed from your handle you were from Tennessee. My sympathy you have to endure the burdens of New Jersey’s infringements of the 2A. I’m not the scholar to know, but Mas can probably speak to us on this question: Have magazine restrictions been challenged to SCOTUS? Still, again, we share a lot of agreement, but not on the NRA. I believe their stand is “no state or federal regulations,” which trips over the “well regulated” wording of 2A. It boils down to what you mean by “well.” Anti-gunners would push it all over the place, whereas the NRA would probably prefer a “well-SELF regulated . . ..”

    If I had the resources, I’d open a pistol range and name it “The Tallahassee Militia.” The two problems are 1) lack of capital, and 2) the stigma attached to modern militias. I worked for the Florida Attorney General and we had routine contact with Florida militias, mostly complaints from sovereign citizens about police infringement on their rights, etc. . . .. Some of those guys are seriously certifiable (they would love your Col. Kurtz quote). So if I hit the lotto, expect Tallahassee Guardians to open and offer low cost, high quality training. Reason being, training is the most important thing we can include in any explanation of “well regulated.” Well trained people are rarely the problem.

    The feds behind supressor suppression have seen too many movies that make suppressors sound like silencers making murder easy. They don’t. They just keep you from losing your hearing during a defense of a home invasion. A noise wakes you in the night and you’re not telling your wife to put on her “eyes and ears,” nor or you going to limit your ability to hear your attackers footsteps and give them a tactical advantage. You’re grabbing you gun and hoping you want loose too much hearing.

    I don’t see denying an 18 year old the right to carry a AR style rifle unless they join the military is a double standard. Very few 18 years olds are qualified to use such a weapon unless they have been properly trained. Actually, I think a 35 year old should be well trained on anything they buy and carry. In Florida, to get a concealed carry license you have to either be a veteran or take a 3 hour class and shoot a .22 a couple of times. On one hand, I appreciate the state’s recognition of vets. But at 70 I got my first CWFL this year. I am a USAF vet with Security Police experience. But it had been almost 50 years since I touched a gun, and most people I trained with got minimal M-16 training and no handgun training, and certainly not one word on Florida concealed carry law. My son, on the other hand, was a Marine, qualified on several weapons including a .50 cal. But he wouldn’t take his Glock out of the house until he had takes a six hour class that including firing several pistols, mostly 9mms.

    Anyway, thanks for reading.

Comments are closed.