Connect with us

Fed Judge Bans Firearms Sales To Those Under 21

2nd Amend.

Fed Judge Bans Firearms Sales To Those Under 21

At the end of October, the fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Houston, Texas rejected the National Rifle Association’s argument that 18-20 year olds had a right to buy guns under the Second Amendment. It also rejected the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment. The U.S. may ban federally licensed firearms dealers from selling guns to anyone under the age of 21.

A unanimous three-judge panel said Congress, in a law dating from 1968, adopted the sales ban to help curb violent crime. It also said that the nation’s founders and 19th-century courts and commentators believed that disarming specific groups did not trample on the right to bear arms.

“Congress was focused on a particular problem: young persons under 21, who are immature and prone to violence, easily accessing handguns,” mainly from licensed dealers, Judge Edward Prado wrote for the panel.



Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.


  1. D Fox

    November 14, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    At age 17 I can’t buy a .22 rifle, so I’ll join the army and fire a 120mm cannon!

  2. Marlin208

    November 14, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    And so it starts. I thought it might take awhile but they are moving ahead with the plan. Next the UN will ban assault rifles and then ammo and then on and on.

    • Sam

      November 14, 2012 at 9:58 pm

      Let’s BAN the UN, throw them OFF OUR LAND and withdraw from the UN. That includes housing them, funding them and supplying any military support.

  3. D Fox

    November 14, 2012 at 5:43 pm

    Hear that 18-20 yr old college girls. It is now open season for rapists!

  4. Dragon

    November 14, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    Marx would be so proud.

  5. CyclingFoodmanPA

    November 14, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    Makes no sense. Someone 18 can go into the military and fight and die for their country, but cannot buy a gun. We are managed by morons and they are getting stupider and stupider!

    • sn

      November 14, 2012 at 7:33 pm

      Aside from that, don’t they think that people 18 and under get guns on the street illegally? I bought my first shotgun at age 18 but already had a 22 caliber single shot rifle.

  6. Bob Higginbotham

    November 14, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    An 18 year old can vote and enlist but is too immature to buy a firearm.

  7. CrustyOldGeezer

    November 14, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    Somebody needs to start asking judges and DAs one question in front of the jury.

    “Do you believe that legislated law supersedes Constitutional Law?”

    ALL ‘gun control’ laws are legislated.

    80 million plus gun owners and no statistics to show any of them committed a crime.

    If 1% committed a ‘gun crime’ it would be 800,000 crimes, but no statistics show that.

    1/10% would be 80,000 still nothing….

    1/100% would be 8,000.. still no supporting data to show that PRIVATE OWNERSHIP of guns is the problem.

    1/1000% 800 ‘gun crimes’ committed by law abiding Citizens. still no data.

    On the other hand, Privately OWNED firearms stopped or prevented well over 1.5 million crimes.

    Thats a lot of RAPES that were not committed. (the police were only minutes away)

    A lot of murders that did not happen.

    A lot of robberies that did not happen.

    The list goes on.

    The problem seems to be the politicians and political appointees that would have the American people believe otherwise.

    • jeepdude911

      November 14, 2012 at 6:11 pm

      You’re absolutely right. The last 4 words of the second amendment are “shall not be infringed”. Any and all gun control laws are unconstitutional.

      • CrustyOldGeezer

        November 14, 2012 at 6:14 pm

        I know.

        What I would really like is for people all over the country to copy those statistics and send them in the their local newspapers as letters to the editor.

  8. pduffy

    November 14, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    Once again, liberalism run amok. You cannot solve a ‘violent crime’ problem with the youth by attempting to ban guns. How about we actually PUNISH THE CRIMINALS, rather than the law abiding? Last I checked, Jerod Laughner is still alive and unpunished for his crime of killing many people and wounding a congresswoman. Do you see the real problem with our society – LIBERALISM is destroying this country.

    • sn

      November 14, 2012 at 7:39 pm

      He should have gotten the electric chair within a year of his crime. That’s what is wrong with the courts. Swift justice IS needed to curb this insanity with these gun toting youngsters.. Back to an Eye for and Eye. OR a life for a LIFE. You kill, you get the chair or the gas chamber…!!! How many have killed and are just sitting in jail getting 3 square meals a day?

  9. RPW

    November 14, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    Well I suppose they can pick on any group, For instance they could ban the sale to anyone who posts on this forum etc. The constitution might as well be toilet paper for these judges.

    • r

      November 14, 2012 at 7:35 pm

      Remember, most of these judges are ancient and are retiring all the time. Aside, they probably have body guards with some hefty fire power….

    • mike88

      November 14, 2012 at 10:15 pm

      Is there any reason why these Judges can’t ne recalled in a Special election.

  10. me

    November 14, 2012 at 6:42 pm

    If they are to immature to own a gun then they are too stupid to vote. The Demorats don’t want to go there because it would throw a curve in their voter base.

    • Danny

      November 15, 2012 at 3:08 am

      Amen brother,amen. If the dem’s applied the same logic to gun rights and voting rights Mit Romney would probably be president elect Romney!!

  11. Mike C

    November 14, 2012 at 6:51 pm

    I just dont understand how this country is going down the tubes literally. I contend the only way out is a 5 million plus march on Washinton Dc plus all the state Houses . Throw out all elected officials and the people will take back this government especially the Obama Administration who is and has committed outright Fraud. The only answer is a 2nd American Revolution, this last 4 years has been lies upon lies and we the people know about it . The people who are responsable are well noted we have their names and they will be dealt with.

    • Sivispace

      November 14, 2012 at 8:12 pm

      The court didn’t ban guns for 18 to 21 year-olds. It only reaffirmed that 18 to 21 year-old citizens cannot buy or possess hand guns. That has been the law since 1968. I agree that millions of us should march on Washington with empty holsters just to make a point that we will tolerate no further encroachment on our rights. But this court did not ban guns outright as the article so misleadingly suggests.

    • r

      November 14, 2012 at 10:04 pm

      That Last election WAS A FRAUD! The votes counted by Soros company, the voting machines owned by Soros and obamy is MOST LIKELY OWNED by Soros. Would one suspect FRAUD?!!!

  12. a_browning

    November 14, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    We let 18 year olds vote, serve in the military, buy cigarettes, enter into legal contracts, consent to medical treatment and a meriad of other things. I believe that they should be able to buy firearms. Make them subject to the same background checks. Heck, even open up juvenile records. If they want a gun then they can sign an authorization for those that do the background check to see if there are violent crimes in their past prior to authorization. If clean, proceed to purchase.

  13. The Chief

    November 14, 2012 at 7:07 pm

    Guess I’ve got to buy more ammo to fight against the coming tyranny. In my Navy (retired Navy Chief) this age group is trained on weapons to help protect this nation from enemies, both foreign and domestic. This court has just become domestic enemies. So be it!

    • r

      November 14, 2012 at 9:59 pm

      Some are even picked by Obozo himself…

  14. Fred Palombi

    November 14, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    Then the minimum age to join the military needs to be raised back to 21!

  15. notax1776

    November 14, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    There sure were a lot of 18 – 20 year old “kids” fighting and dying in Vietnam. 61% of those killed in Vietnam were under the age of 21. Maybe if the government had decided they were too young to have a gun, they would not have been sent. For what it was worth, I turned 21 while serving and never felt too young to be toting a weapon.

  16. thismustend

    November 14, 2012 at 8:18 pm

    Does this apply to mexican & blac k gang bangers too? Will they be lining up to turn in their ILLEGAL guns? All this does is endanger law abiding youth & empower criminals. If your kid is unarmed but the criminals are not that makes your kid a sitting duck. It never fails to amaze me that liberals can’t understand this concept.
    Isn’t ObaMAOland great?

  17. Ron

    November 14, 2012 at 8:22 pm

    when I was in the Marines I wanted to buy a lever action 30 cal. rifle from the P X N C state law said I had to be 21 to buy it so I wasn’t allowed . I had a 30 Cal M1 Grand in my locker in the barracks. go figure . but the laws the law . I was 17 when I bought my first .22 cal and a 12 ga shotgun at Sears. at 19 I bought my first .22 cal revolver . all I had to have for it was my mom told the guy you can sell it to Ron as I give my permission for him to have it .

    • Arizona Don

      November 15, 2012 at 2:39 pm

      Here is a thought for all. When I was nine (9) my grandfather gave me a double barrel shotgun. That should tick him off. WGAS!

  18. mike88

    November 14, 2012 at 10:13 pm

    Just because Judges have Degrees in Law, does not make them smarter, more intelligent, or even have an abundance of common sense. Take for example Judge Judy, she always claims on her commercials for her show, and I quote, “they don’t keep me here because I am beautiful, they keep me here because I am smart”.
    I would wager to say that no they don’t keep her show on because she is either smart or beautiful, I would wager to say they keep her show on because she is arrogant, sarcastic, and bitchy, especially in her remarks to people who have different opinions or beliefs then herself, and her sarcastic remarks she makes to people in the Courtroom (you notice I didn’t say Her courtroom) allows the network to keep her on the air because her sarcastic remarks to people gives the networks good ratings, and good ratings means more sponsors, which means the network that carries her show receives more revenue from the sponsors.
    In other words her sarcasm makes the networks money. That is why they keep her around.

  19. jim

    November 14, 2012 at 11:28 pm


  20. richard

    November 14, 2012 at 11:28 pm

    I am ashamed that judge is from Texas, now in the state of Texas if you are in the military you can get a cancealed handgun license at the age of 18, even though you cannot legally own a handgun (by federal law) until you reach 21, go figure. And by the way it is legal for an 18 years old to buy a rifle or shotgun at the age of 18, just not a handgun.

  21. Danny

    November 15, 2012 at 3:00 am

    The problem with public officials is that they don’t understand the meaning of the phrase “PUBLIC SERVANT” They are under the impression that they are some kind of royalty and that they rule by define right. The people need to stand up to these tyrants and let them know that they work for us. not the other way around. until then things are only get worse.

  22. James Fontana

    November 15, 2012 at 7:16 am

    More federal judges drinking the Obama kool aid. These judges need to be defrocked. If a teenage thug wants a gun he will get it regardsless of the law. The only gun control needed in this country is hitting your target. Obama is afraid of guns but the one that may cause him harm is already out there.

  23. Arizona Don

    November 15, 2012 at 2:35 pm

    Perhaps we should ask that judge if an eighteen year old can both vote and be a fighting person in our military (where they use guns by the way) why can he not be allowed to purchase one legally as a civilian at that age? That should be easy to answer

  24. kerry cale

    November 15, 2012 at 2:52 pm

    If your’e old enough to vote and to serve and die for your country you should have full rights under the constitution. You can’t have it both ways.

  25. kin in elpaso

    November 15, 2012 at 3:46 pm

    Ok, fine. Nobody under 21 votes or serves in a combat zone either. Bundle that all together and see how far you get with it.

  26. Johnny Geetar

    November 15, 2012 at 5:49 pm

    What a crock! 18 year olds can join the military, operate firearms, and die for their country, but they don’t qualify to carry firearms AS CIVILIANS because they’re TOO IMMATURE? Texas, where are these dirtbag, liberal judges coming from, and why haven’t they been run out of town tied to the back of a pickup yet?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in 2nd Amend.



Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.

To Top
Don't miss a thing. Sign up for our email newsletter to become a Patriot Outdoor News insider.

Send this to friend