Constitutional Carry Ruled Unconstitutional in Texas

[AllenOne1]

9 min
This is an interesting discussion about a court ruling in TX potentially giving 18-20 year old's the right to carry a handgun. The court suggested a couple of paths to do this that they felt stayed within the constitutional guidelines.

What are your thoughts on adding any requirements to 18-20 year old's in order to carry?

Personally I think some type of training should be available, maybe required or at least recommended. Carrying a weapon comes with a lot of responsibilities and legal issues. A course designed to cover these issues would be of great value in keeping these young adults out of trouble. Older adults as well as far as that goes.

 

[tomcatmv]

While I somewhat agree with you, this IMO is one of those "slippery slope" issues.
I was taught gun safety at a young age by my Dad and then in the BSA and shot on my high school rifle team (yeah, we actually had such a thing back in the sixties).
Training is always a good thing. My concern is, now are you going to need a license/certificate to show .gov?
Hmmm. 1930's Germany rings a bell.

 

[AllenOne1]

While I somewhat agree with you, this IMO is one of those "slippery slope" issues.
I was taught gun safety at a young age by my Dad and then in the BSA and shot on my high school rifle team (yeah, we actually had such a thing back in the sixties).
Training is always a good thing. My concern is, now are you going to need a license/certificate to show .gov?
Hmmm. 1930's Germany rings a bell.

Yes we had a high school trap team when I was in HS. We also took a Hunters Safety Course as a teenager which I thought was one of the best classes I ever took, learned a lot.

I totally agree with your "slippery slope" position, my concern is firearms safety is one element which can be learned via several avenues but the legal side of the coin is completely different, where do you learn that. I fully support young adults right to carry but at the same time I don't want to set them up for trouble that can ruin their life.

 

[EddieNFL]

9 min
This is an interesting discussion about a court ruling in TX potentially giving 18-20 year old's the right to carry a handgun. The court suggested a couple of paths to do this that they felt stayed within the constitutional guidelines.

What are your thoughts on adding any requirements to 18-20 year old's in order to carry?

Personally I think some type of training should be available, maybe required or at least recommended. Carrying a weapon comes with a lot of responsibilities and legal issues. A course designed to cover these issues would be of great value in keeping these young adults out of trouble. Older adults as well as far as that goes.

So, what age group would be exempted from said training?

 

[Bullfrog08]

Shall not be infringed!!!! You either believe in it, or you dont.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Training... to be carried out by responsible parents as it is not a responsibility of "The State." Same as schooling, agriculture and a million other things that are usurped to create a nanny state full of helmet-wearing retards who line up for medical experimentation...

Show me where in the Constitution it says the state is responsible for your life? It doesn't. Marbury vs. Madison affirms that further.

Screw that commie judge and that commie court. They are just trying to stir the pot, screw with Texas and raise the temperature in America a bit more... And none of this crap will end well.

Sirhr

 

[pmclaine]

Every town should have a training field with voluntary weekly meetings which any citizen can attend and get instruction and training.

 

[Blue Sky Country]

Old enough to apply for and get a motorcycle or driver's license and drive responsibly, old enough to carry a firearm responsibly.

Old enough to serve our country on the battlefield, DEFINITELY old enough to carry a firearm.

 

[Heartstopper]

Couldnt agree more. Had this discussion on the range yesterday. My son has been training for many years and will be 18 next year. More responsible than his years.

 

[Campguy308]

Just looking at this from a constitutional standpoint, what other right requires training if you are under 21?

 

[AllenOne1]

Training... to be carried out by responsible parents as it is not a responsibility of "The State." Same as schooling, agriculture and a million other things that are usurped to create a nanny state full of helmet-wearing retards who line up for medical experimentation...

Show me where in the Constitution it says the state is responsible for your life? It doesn't. Marbury vs. Madison affirms that further.

Screw that commie judge and that commie court. They are just trying to stir the pot, screw with Texas and raise the temperature in America a bit more... And none of this crap will end well.

Sirhr

You didn't watch the video. The judge is ruling against TX in this instance because it excluded the 18-20 year old adults, not because he is against carry.

 

[AllenOne1]

So, what age group would be exempted from said training?

There is the slippery slope isn't it. Is the training, if any, mandatory or is it recommended. Who would offer the training, gun range, game and parks, police departments, individuals with an interest in carry law, lawyers, NRA. Who would develop the training material?

I like the idea of having a recommended course, but, there is no course other than the current concealed carry courses required in several states that I'm aware of.

The easy way is to grant them the right to carry and wish them luck.

 

[LawnMM]

You didn't watch the video. The judge is ruling against TX in this instance because it excluded the 18-20 year old adults, not because he is against carry.

Can you purchase a pistol prior to 21 in TX?

Perhaps that's why they were excluded.

 

[AllenOne1]

Can you purchase a pistol prior to 21 in TX?

Perhaps that's why they were excluded.

Maybe that is going to change too as Federal law prohibits the sale of a handgun to a person under 21.

"What’s the age to buy a gun? The answer is simple: through a private sale. A Texas resident 18 or older but under 21 won’t be allowed to purchase a handgun through an FFL dealer but that person can purchase a handgun from another Texas resident. Sales between two people who aren’t licensed dealers are called private sales."

 

[RGStory]

You didn't watch the video. The judge is ruling against TX in this instance because it excluded the 18-20 year old adults, not because he is against carry.

Attached the case itself for those interested.

 

[Bigfatcock]

Train this dick. If they can vote, or join the military, then they can carry a damn pistol.

 

[Docsherm]

Old enough to vote or drink a beer, old enough to carry a gun..... oh wait......

 

[david walter]

They don’t have a requirement to have training for freedom of religion, free speech, voting, etc.

This is good that the judge sees an age requirement as unconstitutional, but bad in that he clearly doesn’t understand the SCOTUS ruling’s abolition on secondary qualifiers to the 2A.

No restrictions above the age of majority, which is the age one gets to vote in most states.

 

[spamassassin]

Text as informed by history and tradition. Delicious. If you're old enough for dying then you're also old enough for killing and voting and drinking. You're still cautioned about the dire risks of mixing any 2 of those.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Just looking at this from a constitutional standpoint, what other right requires training if you are under 21?

When the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written, we had just come out of a war where soldiers as young as 8 and 9 served as drummers... and young teens as infantry.

The only ages I can recall in the Constitution and/or BoR are age required to be President and Vice President.

In the early years, state legislatures controlled the vote and it was white males age 21 and older who owned Property (mainly land.) IIRC, this was 'overturned' by Jackson and Jacksonian Democrats who were not happy with the system of voting and wanted 'popular/mob' rule... as it was the only way Jackson was going to get to be President.

And it was not until the 1970's that an amendment went into place allowing 18 year olds to vote. Allowing all the hippies to start voting against Nixon.

So Constitutionally, nothing had an age limit except, I think, serving as POTUS and VPOTUS... But this is from memory, so I could be wrong.

Sirhr

 

[hlee]

Just so we don’t go too much further down the wrong rabbit hole, I snipped this from the text provided. You might be surprised to learn that the title of the thread and the video are both ‘click bait…’

Further, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 57) and DENIES Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 45, 48, 51).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that:

1. To the extent that Texas’s statutory scheme, TEX. PENAL CODE § 46.02(a) and TEX. GOV’T CODE §§ 411.172(a)(2), (g), (h), (i), prohibits law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying handguns for self-defense outside the home based solely on their age, this statutory scheme violates the Second Amendment, as incorporated against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment.

2. Defendants and all their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons who are in active concert or participation with them are hereby ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from enforcing Texas’s statutory scheme against law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds based solely on their age.

3. This injunction is hereby STAYED for thirty days, or pending appeal, for the duration of the appellate process. SO ORDERED on this 25th day of August 2022.

 

[spamassassin]

Just so we don’t go too much further down the wrong rabbit hole, I snipped this from the text provided. You might be surprised to learn that the title of the thread and the video are both ‘click bait…’

Further, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 57) and DENIES Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 45, 48, 51).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that:

1. To the extent that Texas’s statutory scheme, TEX. PENAL CODE § 46.02(a) and TEX. GOV’T CODE §§ 411.172(a)(2), (g), (h), (i), prohibits law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying handguns for self-defense outside the home based solely on their age, this statutory scheme violates the Second Amendment, as incorporated against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment.

2. Defendants and all their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons who are in active concert or participation with them are hereby ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from enforcing Texas’s statutory scheme against law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds based solely on their age.

3. This injunction is hereby STAYED for thirty days, or pending appeal, for the duration of the appellate process. SO ORDERED on this 25th day of August 2022.

Yeah, homies that can read often don't. I watched the video because dem tiddies on blondie is bangin'.

 

[AllenOne1]

Just so we don’t go too much further down the wrong rabbit hole, I snipped this from the text provided. You might be surprised to learn that the title of the thread and the video are both ‘click bait…’

Further, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 57) and DENIES Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 45, 48, 51).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that:

1. To the extent that Texas’s statutory scheme, TEX. PENAL CODE § 46.02(a) and TEX. GOV’T CODE §§ 411.172(a)(2), (g), (h), (i), prohibits law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying handguns for self-defense outside the home based solely on their age, this statutory scheme violates the Second Amendment, as incorporated against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment.

2. Defendants and all their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons who are in active concert or participation with them are hereby ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from enforcing Texas’s statutory scheme against law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds based solely on their age.

3. This injunction is hereby STAYED for thirty days, or pending appeal, for the duration of the appellate process. SO ORDERED on this 25th day of August 2022.

Absolute click bait, the title and the blonde.

 

[hlee]

Absolute click bait, the title and the blonde.

Yeah, the thumbnail shows Thomas, so no real reason to click. And, the blonde is cute but she ain’t showing nothing so no reason to investigate.

 

[Romeo458]

Giving 18 to 20 year olds a few hoops to jump through or requiring them to get a license to carry is putting a burden on their rights. In one breath they say we need to give them full rights but in the next breath they're gonna make them do all of that shit.

 

[BullGear]

When did it become law that anyone had to be 21 to buy a handgun? Well, thanks again to the illegal passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. This law was so anti 2a it should have never been enacted. It should have been reviewed and struck down. But in those times with the Kennedys and MLK, it seemed like it was needed. How wrong they were and still are.

 

[Bigfatcock]

When did it become law that anyone had to be 21 to buy a handgun? Well, thanks again to the illegal passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. This law was so anti 2a it should have never been enacted. It should have been reviewed and struck down. But in those times with the Kennedys and MLK, it seemed like it was needed. How wrong they were and still are.

Voting harder will fix it.

 

[chevy_man]

9 min
This is an interesting discussion about a court ruling in TX potentially giving 18-20 year old's the right to carry a handgun. The court suggested a couple of paths to do this that they felt stayed within the constitutional guidelines.

What are your thoughts on adding any requirements to 18-20 year old's in order to carry?

Personally I think some type of training should be available, maybe required or at least recommended. Carrying a weapon comes with a lot of responsibilities and legal issues. A course designed to cover these issues would be of great value in keeping these young adults out of trouble. Older adults as well as far as that goes.

I agree, we should have gun safety taught in schools from k-12. Every year the kids get a refresher on how to not be stupid.

I'm sure it would make a dent in a lot of the "I shot my buddy because I didn't know I wasn't supposed to point a gun at him".

 

[HeavyAssault]

Interesting for sure....But Chicago doesn't have this problem now do they.

 

[spamassassin]

Voting harder will fix it.

The trendline from the last 100 years seems to contraindicate this.

 

[dustingaunder]

I believe in Texas you can buy a handgun at 18 from private parties, only 21 from an FFL. That’s 100% true in Oklahoma for sure.

 

[Rthur]

Weird, I thought the constitution was to limit what the government could do...

R

 

[spamassassin]

Weird, I thought the constitution was to limit what the government could do...

R

It was. Just about the minute it was ratified government put it to one side just like governments are wont to do and nobody said anything or did anything. It's been downhill since then. One would have thought that this wouldn't have escaped being noticed.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

There shouldn’t be any restrictions at all. Freedom means freedom and if we were men we’d demand open carry of briefcase nukes by 13 year old 5x felons to be legal.

 

[lash]

Just looking at this from a constitutional standpoint, what other right requires training if you are under 21?

Well, this may be a stretch, but driving comes to mind.

Weird, I thought the constitution was to limit what the government could do...

R

Exactly. And in a sense, this ruling did just that. It’s a good thing that will be mostly misinterpreted by those on both sides.

 

[lash]

However, with rights come responsibilities. Those that exercise their rights and also take personal responsibility for their actions should be fine.

In theory…

 

[TurboTrout]

TX always hated real freedom (Waco much)

And they fully embrace qualified immunity (uvalde much)

Has always been the Middle East of the US

But hey y’all got little Texas stars on all your overpasses so that’s cool

 

[gunsnjeeps]

When did it become law that anyone had to be 21 to buy a handgun? Well, thanks again to the illegal passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. This law was so anti 2a it should have never been enacted. It should have been reviewed and struck down. But in those times with the Kennedys and MLK, it seemed like it was needed. How wrong they were and still are.

Democrats. Been pushing gun control ever since.

 

[The D]

What age can they sign up to kill innocent brown people in other parts of the world? Constitutional carry should be at least that

 

[RUTGERS95]

9 min
This is an interesting discussion about a court ruling in TX potentially giving 18-20 year old's the right to carry a handgun. The court suggested a couple of paths to do this that they felt stayed within the constitutional guidelines.

What are your thoughts on adding any requirements to 18-20 year old's in order to carry?

Personally I think some type of training should be available, maybe required or at least recommended. Carrying a weapon comes with a lot of responsibilities and legal issues. A course designed to cover these issues would be of great value in keeping these young adults out of trouble. Older adults as well as far as that goes.

disagree as we don't give training on how your vote can screw up the country do we? A right is a right, period

 

[TurboTrout]

disagree as we don't give training on how your vote can screw up the country do we? A right is a right, period

Also the state didn’t give them a right, if they could give them a right it would be a privilege

The citizens always had that right

 

[OkieMike]

While young people tend to be inexperienced, age isn't the best indicator of competence.

A lot of kids would probably do just fine.

I know people older than me that I wouldn't trust with a potato peeler but they are still free to tote iron.

Mike

 

[BullGear]

While young people tend to be inexperienced, age isn't the best indicator of competence.

A lot of kids would probably do just fine.

I know people older than me that I wouldn't trust with a potato peeler but they are still free to tote iron.

Mike

Stupid is as stupid does. Age is not a requirement for doing stupid things. If I could sit down and talk to you about what I've seen from all ages. You would be astounded. What about a woman (about 35 years old) sitting on the side of the railroad tracks trying to orgasm using a gas generator while she was supposed to be watching out for trains while others work on the tracks? Same woman got pregnant and was trying to come up with a name. He name is Doreen, so they guys said that it's a (B)oy she should name it Boreen. Now this was just a joke. When she came back to work, they asked her what she had and the name of the child, she said boy and Boreen.

We also had a few people who broke the rules and paid with their lives.

 

[Campguy308]

Well, this may be a stretch, but driving comes to mind.

The issue with that is that driving is not protected by the Constitution.

 

[TurboTrout]

The issue with that is that driving is not protected by the Constitution.

Isn’t it?

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

Old enough to be issued a rifle/pistol and sent to war to kill/die but not old enough to carry?

Get fucked

 

[BAMAboy18]

9 min
This is an interesting discussion about a court ruling in TX potentially giving 18-20 year old's the right to carry a handgun. The court suggested a couple of paths to do this that they felt stayed within the constitutional guidelines.

What are your thoughts on adding any requirements to 18-20 year old's in order to carry?

Personally I think some type of training should be available, maybe required or at least recommended. Carrying a weapon comes with a lot of responsibilities and legal issues. A course designed to cover these issues would be of great value in keeping these young adults out of trouble. Older adults as well as far as that goes.

1st thing that needs explaining; it's not something to brag about and show it off to all your friends. Dad gave me an HK 9mm when I was 18. Never got in any trouble with it, but that's just me.

 

[TurboTrout]

the 2A is pretty clearly written and further reaffirmed in the federalist papers

If you’re for constitutional carry….but…
You’re actually against the 2A, constitution, and American values, which is ok, sad but ok, however just be honest about it

 

[The King]

I have taught well north of 5000 students at this point in weapons handling.

Dumfucks with guns are still dumbfucks with guns after training, and responsible intelligent people don't benefit nearly as much from it as you would think.

I'm against mandatory training to exercise a Constitutional right. I'm also entirely for mandatory military service at 18 complete with firearms training and the issue of a government rifle and pistol to take home at the end of it. If you fail military firearms training its considered a disqualifying offense WRT gun ownership.

 

[TurboTrout]

I have taught well north of 5000 students at this point in weapons handling.

Dumfucks with guns are still dumbfucks with guns after training, and responsible intelligent people don't benefit nearly as much from it as you would think.

I'm against mandatory training to exercise a Constitutional right. I'm also entirely for mandatory military service at 18 complete with firearms training and the issue of a government rifle and pistol to take home at the end of it. If you fail military firearms training its considered a disqualifying offense WRT gun ownership.

I’m with you up till making conscripts

It doesn’t work well as far as having a good combat force, and frankly we have not had a honorable war in my lifetime

Now embracing the militia and having that part of high school and college I fully support