As I said, I was unaware until recently that Florida restricts hand gun sale to people under 21 while allowing a rifle to be purchased after reaching age 18. I see very little benefit to society from this restriction, but if a 21 year old is more responsible (as some people obviously think) then it is a better age for rifle purchases too.
I would exempt former and current military from this age restriction. I believe if we ask someone to defend us at the potential cost of their lives, we can extend the right to own a tool for self protection.
As far as age restrictions, I would point out that insurance and car rentals are restrictive until one reaches age 25. I will leave it to these businesses as to why they don’t want younger people to use their products.
(But trust me, there is a reason.)
The other thing about age restriction is that people younger than 18 can also arguably need tools for self protection, but we understand that mature and responsible use of a firearm is related to age. It is not the same for all people so if you want to make an argument for an exception to the general rule you are welcome to do so.
All of your other examples are valid. This age restriction to me is a bit of fluff that seems to make some people happy. All I said was that I could live with an arbitrary age restriction if it had exemptions for military and any others with a valid need for a weapon for self protection. I have left hunting out of this argument because if you family hunts to sustain themselves, then that is self protection. And if hunting is for sport, I would allow that based on the region of the country.
BTW, I also do not believe that the 2A has anything to do with hunting.
If. The rationale behind the various age limitations should be part of the discussion rather than just throwing numbers out to placate feelings.
“I would exempt former and current military from this age restriction. “
As far as I know, younger military members are under pretty close supervision when bearing arms. When not under close supervision some of them can act just as improperly as their non-military contemporaries.
“I believe if we ask someone to defend us at the potential cost of their lives, we can extend the right to own a tool for self protection.”
Which implies they don't have that right to begin with. Some would argue they already have that right.
“(But trust me, there is a reason.)”
The reasons for any of the restrictions/permissions need to be part of the discussion
“..but we understand that mature and responsible use of a firearm is related to age.”
But only related. There are other considerations, such as the degree of maturity and responsibility that have been ingrained no matter what the age.
” It is not the same for all people so if you want to make an argument for an exception to the general rule you are welcome to do so.”
I'd prefer to see arguments for a general rule especially if it has a knee jerk application.
“...I could live with...” “...I would allow...”
Under discussion is what some people consider their right and the right of others regardless of whether or not you or anyone else could live with or would allow it. If the right is to be disallowed to anyone, reasoning as to why needs to be presented.