The 11th Circuit ruled that Florida’s law banning those under 21 from purchasing a firearm is Constitutional because:
The Florida law that prohibits minors from purchasing firearms does not violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments because it is consistent with our historical tradition of firearm regulation. From the founding to the late-nineteenth century, our law limited the purchase of firearms by minors in different ways. The Florida law also limits the purchase of firearms by minors. And it does so for the same reason: to stop immature and impulsive individuals, like Nikolas Cruz, from harming themselves and others with deadly weapons.
The 11th Circuit on Friday ruled that the laws at the time of the nation’s founding restricted the purchase of firearms by minors and defined a minor as someone under the age of 21. The court stated that minors needed parental consent to access guns, even if they were performing militia service.
“First, minors generally could not purchase firearms because they lacked the judgment and discretion to enter contracts and to receive the wages of their labor. Second, minors were subject to the power of their parents and depended on their parents’ consent to exercise rights and deal with others in society,” Chief U.S. Circuit Judge William Pryor wrote on behalf of the majority.
Except Nikolas Cruz wasn’t a minor. He was over the age of 18 when he bought that rifle. This means that those citizens who are 18, 19, and 20 years old are not adults, if one is to accept this reading of the US Constitution. If one were to accept this definition, then those in that age group cannot enter contracts, receive wages, and must be dependent upon their parents consent to exercise rights or deal with others in society. To say otherwise means that those in this age group are second class citizens.
This is a court that is clearly twisting the law to mean whatever they decide it will mean in order to achieve their desired results. Anyone who depends upon the courts to save them is sadly delusional.
Again, there is only one sure result- this nation will fall. Whatever replaces it is likely to not look like it did in George Washington’s day, or even in Teddy Roosevelt’s day. Those days are gone forever and will not return.
8 Comments
Tennessee Budd · March 15, 2025 at 7:17 pm
Fine, if that’s how the law of the land is. Move draft & voting age to 21. No signing contracts under 21. Follow it down the line. It’s one or the other: either you are an adult, with the full rights & responsibilities of citizenship, or you’re not.
Aesop · March 18, 2025 at 5:34 am
Asked and answered.
The 11th Circus decided to overlook that the terms of the social contract were inalterably changed by the 26th Amendment, so their decision is moot, and jackassical. (Which is the default setting for half of all federal black-robed jackasses.)
Florida’s law is unconstitutional prima facie, and upholding it rests upon the same legal framework that would argue that discrimination based u[pon race is okay because the Constitution once said blacks were not persons, and only equal to 3/5ths of a white man.
The judges who issued this ruling should be under impeachment for being out of their minds already. No one that crazy should be allowed to remain on the federal bench.
Dirty Dingus McGee · March 15, 2025 at 8:37 pm
Aren’t these the same folks that want to allow 16 year olds to vote? Maybe not the same court, the folks with the same mindset.
Vinson · March 16, 2025 at 10:40 am
WtaF? 🤦🏻♂️😮💨
Boneman · March 16, 2025 at 6:19 am
Absurd. You can’t play it both ways. If someone is 18 years of age, can enlist in the military and carry a firearm sans “Parental Approval” then what’s the sense of this ruling?
EN2 SS · March 16, 2025 at 3:21 pm
There you go again, expecting sense from D/S/C/R (demoncrat/socialist/communist/retard).
JimmyPx · March 16, 2025 at 12:02 pm
BUT just 6 months ago the 8 US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the EXACT opposite:
https://txgunrights.org/8th-circuit-18-to-20-year-olds-can-carry-firearms/
This ruling needs to be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Aesop · March 18, 2025 at 5:41 am
Dueling Circuits.
This is a virtual lock to go to SCOTUS on that basis, because the laws must be equally enforced.
I’m hoping while we still have the majority, Alito will write the opinion that any weapons law passed after 1787 is unconstitutional, both de facto and de jure.
Proposed test for constitutionality for any law regarding any sort of “arms” would be in two parts:
Did you write this law after 1787?
NO? You’re cool.
YES? It’s unconstitutional. Get out of my court, and if you do it again, there will be criminal penalties for violation of civil rights under color of authority.
That would end all 2A controversy forever, other than the occasional frog-march and prison terms for legislatures, governors, and judges: a consummation devoutly to be wished.
Comments are closed.