[marktwain]

The Third Circuit declined to hear the case en banc. The only further appeal is to the Supreme Court.

[ComputerGuy]

I’m sure the Founders intended for our rights to be subject to the whims of non-elected lawyers. It’s got to be in the Constitution somewhere.

[lightman]

Ping

[lightman]

Pennsylvania Ping!

Please ping me with articles of interest.

FReepmail me to be added to the list.

[PROCON]

RKBA Ping List

This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.

More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.

[Gay State Conservative]

later

[libertylover]

On February 15, 2024, the defendants argued that 18-20-year-old people were not considered to be part of the people.

But they have no qualms about sending other people's 18-20-year-olds off to die for some leftwing pie in the sky cause.

[Bon of Babble]

which forbids 18-20-year-olds from obtaining a concealed carry permit

If they're old enough to march off to war carrying weaponry, they're old enough to obtain a concealed carry permit.

[Delta 21]

When educated people cant properly define what an “infringement” or a “woman” is, they need immediately removed/denied from whatever position of power they may hold or are attempting to aquire.

If you wanna play stupid you get treated like you are stupid.

[bunkerhill7]

13 year old boy armed with a musket bayoneted a British officer at the Battle of Saratoga, 1777. partial source:
“Northern Traveler”, 1841. P. 41.

[CIB-173RDABN]

I am old enough to remember when schools had shooting clubs with rifle ranges on campus, or when the Boy Scouts were teaching gun safety.

[GailA]

btt

[Blood of Tyrants]

I’m sure the SC is getting tired of telling the states that “shall not be infringed” means what it says. And to argue that 18-20 year olds aren’t people is patently ridiculous.

[MrKatykelly]

The simple question is, “are you saying all our wars are fought by adolescents?”

Its stupid this issue ever comes up.

[woodpusher]

The Commissioner argued:

The relevant historical background here demonstrates that the citizens who adopted the Second and Fourteenth Amendments did not regard under-21-year-olds to be among “the people” protected by the right to bear arms.

The argument is not whether the guaranteed right of the people may be infringed, but whether those 18-20 years old are among The People who were covered by the right. They argue that, at the Framing, those under 21 were not considered of The People.

Of course, among other things, the 26th Amendment made inviolate the right of those 18 years of age to vote in any Federal election, including that for President of the United States. It can hardly be disputed that currently those 18-20 are not of The People.

Nor can those 18-20 be considered infants, as we would have infants eligible to vote for President.