Forums

Guns always seems to be a hot topic in relation to America, but what I find is never acknowledged, and perhaps it's just me, is that an individual must be 21 years old in order to have a sip of alcohol, yet, 18 years old to pick up an assault rifle and decide who should live and who should die.

For starters, I do not want anyone to get the wrong idea about this post. I do not wish to offend or discredit any of those who fight for our freedom and protect us on a daily basis-I too have people that I love fighting on the front lines-it is more out of curiosity to reveal others' opinions on the matter. I mean, at the age of 18 I could barely tell you what I wanted to go to university for and here we are allowing teenagers unlimited access to highly dangerous firepower. Yes, there are two sides to every argument/opinion, and although there are some individuals who are mentally and physically prepared to handle the consequences of their actions-given the appropriate training-should there not still be a worry? There is an enormous amount of responsibility that comes along with making life altering decisions within the span of a split second, and I do not think that anyone is prepared for a moment like that, regardless of age. However, I do believe that there needs to be some sort of boundary.

I am sure the government sees things much differently, that in a way they are obtaining support and creating stronger relationships between the state and the individual members of the community. I would agree that by reaching out to various age groups, and genders, and receiving a positive response back solidifies the belief that there is a want to exercise choice in the matter; yet, I cannot get passed the fact that kids are essentially doing so much damage in the name of peace. Where is the peace in participating in violent acts against others? I understand that we all make choices in our lives and that they essentially shape the outcome of various instances, but maybe teenagers should be left to make a few more "bad choices" that have a less likely outcome of winding them up in a morgue.

This topic is one that I have wondered and questioned about before… I never understood how easy it is for young Americans to have access to a gun. That was until I walked into a fishing store in the United States (similar to Bass Pro Shops in Canada). They have guns lined up for people to purchase, and it does not take a lot of information or training for an individual to purchase one.
It does not make sense that an 18 year old in the United States can legally purchase and have access to a gun, but it would be deemed illegal for them to have a sip of beer. How does the government think it is okay for mere children to purchase these weapons that can potentially take away a life? How do they determine that the age of 18 is acceptable to do so? Is it because of the Constitution? Don’t get me wrong, alcohol can do the same as well. It’s just that at 20 years old, I barely know what I want. I would not like the responsibility of carrying a gun that could cause so much damage.
I agree with Hannah that only certain people in authoritative positions should bear arms; it makes it easy to track and manage what is going on and who has access to these very powerful weapons. This issue is one that has been debated about for years and comes up every time an unfortunate event happens. The government needs to regulate these privileges to make the country a better and safer place for all.