The question thus becomes one of whether or not the Second Amendment protects a minor's possession of a firearm. Readers might guess that I'll have difficulty finding a way of reconciling shall not be infringed with a lack of protection for such a right. Those readers would be correct.Here's the comment I left:
As a parent, I'm mixed. Do we go down the slippery-slope and say it's OK for grade school children to walk around w/ handguns unsupervised? Drop the age to 16? 12?
With parents legally responsible for youth under the age of 18, who becomes responsible/accountable should something happen?
It's a legitimate debate that needs to be examined for not only Constitutional issues but safety issues as well.
Initially I think we should look at getting the handgun/long-gun ages at all levels dropped to age 18.
Kurt also notes that the state is ignoring the fact that the 9th Circuit (of which WA is a part of) ruled for incorporation.
We let kids drive at 15 or 16...if they are mature enough. Each parent decides if they want to let their child get a license.
ReplyDeleteWe hold kids as young as 15 responsible as adults for their crimes.
I know 19 year olds that are less mature and responsible than my 16 year old.
I don't think there is a single answer to the issue. I do know that it should be the parents choice, not the governments.
As with anything, if there is a problem....criminalize the irresponsible action, not the possession.
I agree with Bob S. This is a choice for parents.
ReplyDeletePersonally, at age 12, I was given my own .22 rifle and kept it my room. I was allowed to come and go as I pleased with it, with the very real knowledge that if I ever misused it, it would be taken away immediately.
I didn't want that to happen, so I used it responsibly.
Maybe my next blog post will be about the time I was spotted in a tree with my rifle by 20 cops.
Goog stuff.
I had a M-14 when I was 17. Yes, it was a real M-14. No, my parents were not around. When I was 18 I had a M-16 and a .45 Automatic Pistol.
ReplyDelete