[PATed]

I just wanted to confirm your opinion: You are okay with a 13-year old being able to purchase an automatic rifle on his own?

[Gene Eric]

>> You are okay with a 13-year old...

13 YOs aren’t sent off to war.

Find a better analogy.

[rktman]

If a 13 yr old has the money to do that.

https://www.autoweapons.com/products/products.html

IF you have the money and your locale has no prohibitions, you too can have one. 😁

[Political Junkie Too]

I just wanted to confirm your opinion: You are okay with a 13-year old being able to purchase an automatic rifle on his own?

I think the distinction needs to be the difference between "purchasing" and "using under adult supervision."

The second amendment speaks to "keep[ing] and bear[ing] arms."

I don't have a problem with children being taught to safely operate weapons, but they were not intended to purchase nor keep them in their own possession. Any suggestion that children ought to be allowed to buy weapons is a separate discussion from whether children can shoot a weapon. I'd argue that the former should not be allowed, and the latter must be done under adult supervision, either by the parent directly or by parental permission from a licensed instructor.

-PJ

[flamberge]

You are okay with a 13-year old being able to purchase an automatic rifle on his own?

Yes.

As long as he is not a registered Democrat. Those people should not be allowed to possess firearms.

You want "common sense gun control"? If "public safety" was the real goal, you would confiscate firearms from Blacks, Homosexual men, Trans-genders (male-to-female), and Leftists of all varieties, in just about that priority.

Take a closer look at the last 10 years of "mass casualty incidents" and group them by category of the perpetrators. There are some very uncomfortable results from that analysis. TLDR? The Straight White Male is not the biggest threat.

My suggestion is a "modest proposal" which is grotesquely unconstitutional? Yep. Would it be effective? Probably. Would it be in accordance with the "rule-of-law"? Nope. Would it be a good idea? Nope.

"Public Safety" is not the goal of any gun control proposal in the present day. It is simply the best rationale for incremental confiscation of firearms (and any other type of weapon - See the United Kingdom, or Australia for current worked examples).

They want a disarmed population, except for their protected enforcer classes, which population is incapable of resisting the demands of the rulers. The rulers are increasingly sociopathic and self-destructive.

This proceeds to some very bad outcomes. History provides us with many relevant examples.