Children do not get the full measure of their rights. The reasons for that are many and generally obvious. They’re not little adults, after all. They’re kids who are just learning about their way in the world.
Kids mature at different rates. Some are mature at 12 while others don’t really hit maturity until well into adulthood.
Yet as a society, we have had to determine a period when we consider people adults. They might not be ready, but we had to draw the line somewhere. As such, we shouldn’t be denying these new, young adults the totality of their rights. But we do.
No one can lawfully purchase a handgun until they’re 21. This is a problem, but at least those in this age group can buy long guns, which means they’re not completely defenseless as they move into adult life with their own houses and apartments.
But California Attorney General Rob Bonta thinks that these young citizens should live with a second-class status and be denied all of their Second Amendment rights.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, as part of a coalition of 19 attorneys general, filed a brief in support of a Minnesota law setting the minimum age at 21 for securing a permit to carry a handgun in public. The case, Worth v. Jacobson, is currently pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit; a three-judge panel of that court affirmed the district court’s decision striking down the law as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, and Minnesota now seeks rehearing before the panel or the full court. The coalition’s brief argues that rehearing is warranted because the panel’s reasoning could undermine efforts by states to protect their citizens through the application of similar age-limitations laws. Most states across the nation impose some age-based restrictions on the possession, purchase, transfer, or use of firearms to promote public safety and curb gun violence within their borders.
“We stand with Minnesota and other states in their efforts to curb gun violence through these kinds of commonsense firearm regulations aimed at improving public safety,” said Attorney General Bonta. “States must have the ability to protect their citizens and communities from gun violence. The panel’s decision affirming the district court’s decision invalidating. Minnesota’s law is inconsistent with our nation’s historical tradition, as well as longstanding state and federal laws imposing age-based restrictions on the purchase, transfer, use, and possession of firearms.”
A California elected official taking this position isn’t shocking.
That doesn’t mean it’s right.
Look, if you’re going to claim that people under 21 are too immature to own a gun, then why do we allow them to vote, enlist in the military, sign contracts, get credit cards, or any of the other things they can do that can have long-lasting ramifications on not just them but many others?
If your argument is that these folks aren’t mature enough and you’re not talking about how they shouldn’t be treated as adults in any way, then I’m going to have a hard time believing you actually believe what you’re saying.
Because understand, he is talking about how these Americans should be treated as second-class citizens. He’s saying they shouldn’t enjoy the totality of their rights simply because he doesn’t like it that particular right.
That’s not how these things work. Bonta failed to make anything approaching a legal argument. He sort of tries at the end there, but he doesn’t really make it.
Instead, he makes it clear that he doesn’t understand the Constitution at all.
