Comments: Once on the easy side

Allow me to engage you on this one, as I have been making the case, privately, for a higher age limit on semi-automatics of any barrel length (or, really, anything with an interchangeable ammo magazine) than on single or double action guns.

Limiting your single-mom to a reliable Colt 38 or pump action shotgun causes no hardship in her defense against a single ex-boyfriend. A rapid reload weapon is the one to choose when defending against zombie attack, or any group of attackers - or when making and offensive *ahem* "assault" say against a school or a concert crowd.

So unless she has more than one ex threatening assault at once, she's good with the wheel gun.

As for "poisoning our kids" with fracking, when has that ever happened?

Posted by johngalt at April 10, 2018 5:15 PM

"ThreeSources: where pride in your ideas goes to die!"™

My imaginary interlocutor responds with "She sure as hell doesn't need an AR-15!" He's not as well-informed as you, but the second part of my response might suffice:

"My problem is that you, progressive white person who lives in a safe community, are taking her options away. I would let her and a responsible firearms dealer decide -- not you.

"It might actually be best. Our subject is 5'5" 125 pounds. Wacko Boyfriendo is 6' and 220. He is bigger, stronger, more aggressive and more confident in a violent situation. The AR is comfortable, reliable, and capable of projecting threat."

I won't call you names, but I will suggest that a nervous young woman of smaller build will have a difficult time appearing imposing with the .38 revolver. I'm not a shotgun guy -- but in front of the kids?"

I'm a nutty libertarian dude -- I cannot imagine why anything is 21 after the 26th Amendment. But I still think this has legs in a consequentialist discussion. Your picks are good for an experienced handler, but why take choices away?

Posted by jk at April 10, 2018 7:11 PM

I can't imagine why anyone opposes Federal Income Taxes after the 16th Amendment either - clearly the passage of a Constitutional Amendment evidences moral certitude on a subject.

Driving licenses (as unconstitutional as they may be) are not issued until age 16, and even then are attached with a growing list of restrictions. Yet for-profit businesses turn away customers below the age of 25. As it turns out, actuarial experience shows that drivers below that age are at significantly higher risk for bad judgment. In addition to this evidence we now have scientific understanding of juvenile human brain development showing that it doesn't fully mature "until at least the mid-20s."

So the same thinking that leads to learning permits for young drivers suggests that young shooters should establish proficiency with less efficient weapons. Is three years really too long to wait for the legal purchase of a high-capacity rifle? I mean, how is age 21 any more arbitrary than 18, or 16, for whatever adult responsibility we may be contemplating? Or age 25 for that matter. When the Constitution was drafted, average lifespans were about half what they are today.

My aim is not to eliminate youth access to high-capacity weapons, but to eliminate or at least reduce their UNSUPERVISED access to them. When purchased and controlled by an adult guardian, I would make no restrictions.

And a .38 Special may not look as menacing as an AR-15 on its own, but in the same diminutive hands one of them will be effective and the other too heavy and awkward to be of any use, whether she pulls the trigger or not.

Posted by johngalt at April 11, 2018 3:53 PM

You left out how much I enjoyed Prohibition until those louche bastards repealed it. I find Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms odd exceptions to the age of majority. Sign contracts, marry, join the Marines -- but no Marlboros!

On the long gun, I'm forever colored. I know -- rather well --one particular female human who is uncomfortable with both heavy handguns and recoil of all but the smallest caliber cartridges. Watching the glow of this person holding an AR-15 in the store changed my life. While it is perhaps heavier in a box on the scale, the three-point stance of shoulder-arm-arm distributes the weight and recoil -- as one might choose an SUV over a motorcycle.

Posted by jk at April 11, 2018 4:57 PM

I only advocate restriction of magazine reloadable weapons, not all long guns. This would cover semi-auto pistols for 18-20 year-olds, by the way. There are other long gun options to choose from.

And a disclaimer: This proposal is theoretical. I think it makes sense and have been soliciting reactions to it. So far I seem to be the only pro-gun person who likes it.

Posted by johngalt at April 12, 2018 5:02 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?