I think the article is pure liberal B/S.Just asking your opinion.
I think the article is pure liberal B/S.Just asking your opinion.
I bet to some, those are not off the table.When there is a maximum age for freedom of speech, for freedom of religion and freedom to peaceably assemble, then we can talk.
I can't help how the link was posted, I didn't write it.Well, there are a few things worth mentioning:
- Metals tend to rust and even change their chrystalline structure,
- Wood can dry rot
So yes a sufficiently old gun should not be bought since you canno verify its function.
If you are talking about the age of the buyer? Well, people tend to get a little bit less tight down there, so a good chance to buy some milsurp and corrosive ammo since you always have some cleaning liquid ready to stop the corrosion.
That’s the criteria, state of mind. One nice thing about the shooting sports is the ability to accommodate folks of huge age ranges and physical abilities.In seriousness, I don't think there should be a maximum age. I DO think there needs to be a point where a person may not be of sufficient sound mind to own or have access to a gun. Looking back, I wouldn't want my grandmothers in assisted living for dementia having access to a firearm as an example. But that isn't strictly an age thing. It is a question of is a person of sound mind? I don't want a 23 year crazy person having access to a gun either if they are in and out of mental health facilities.
If a person is basically at a mental place they need to be someone's ward (of the state, of their spouse, of their family, whatever), then I don't think they should have access to firearms. Or driving for that matter. Or their own finances. Etc.
People in assisted living that I know, aren't allowed access to firearms or cars.In seriousness, I don't think there should be a maximum age. I DO think there needs to be a point where a person may not be of sufficient sound mind to own or have access to a gun. Looking back, I wouldn't want my grandmothers in assisted living for dementia having access to a firearm as an example. But that isn't strictly an age thing. It is a question of is a person of sound mind? I don't want a 23 year crazy person having access to a gun either if they are in and out of mental health facilities.
If a person is basically at a mental place they need to be someone's ward (of the state, of their spouse, of their family, whatever), then I don't think they should have access to firearms. Or driving for that matter. Or their own finances. Etc.
And that should be a family decision, not a state decision. When my Father lived with me in the beginnings of Dementia I secured his guns in my house where he couldn't access them without me present. Just like I did for my kids when they were small.People in assisted living that I know, aren't allowed access to firearms or cars.
I wouldn't want my elderly grandparent who lives alone to be defenseless when the home invader breaks down the door. If they're capable of living alone, they're probably OK with a firearm.
Go to 2:17, though the whole thing is goodYes and it should be 969 years. That way even Methuselah could by one.
Go to 2:17, though the whole thing is good
Make the maximum. age to buy a gun equal to the 'maximum age to drive' and see how many people support the idea...
FIFYMake the maximum. age to buy a gun equal to the 'maximum age to Vote' and see how many people support the idea...
Nope... I meant 'maximum age to drive' versus 'vote'. Unfortunately, many people are more interested in their right to drive than their right to vote. Sad but true.FIFY
NewsWeek ... just another hyperbolic yellow journalism rag !
My Dad is 89. Yesterday he bought a New Henry .22 lever gun.