Walmart and Dick's raising gun buying age to 21. Do you agree? POLL

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Walmart and Dick's raising gun buying age to 21. Do you agree?

  • YES they should raise it to 21

    Votes: 8 40.0%
  • NO it should remain at 18

    Votes: 7 35.0%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 5 25.0%

  • Total voters
    20
Aug 2, 2009
20,303
545
113
52
#1
Last edited:

Desdichado

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2014
7,506
177
63
#2
Yep, that next homicidal-suicidal psychopath won't be able to pre-meditate around this legal barrier. :rolleyes:

Walmart and Dick's Sporting Goods have raised their gun buying age to 21. Federal law says 18 can purchase a gun (after background check).

Note that many 18 year olds serve in the military and some have died fighting for our country.

Do you agree with raising the purchase age to 21?

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/walmart-raises-gun-purchase-age-to-21
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
21,972
366
83
#3
I thought it was 21 all along........soooooooo
 

oldethennew

Senior Member
Feb 28, 2016
7,446
292
83
#4
whether you are right or wrong 'P', we know in our hearts about 'carringing'...

hub and myself would NEVER 'carry' unless our Saviour gave us any reason to do so!!!
 

Desdichado

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2014
7,506
177
63
#5
You're 69 and you've lived your entire life without ever feeling the need to carry?

whether you are right or wrong 'P', we know in our hearts about 'carringing'...

hub and myself would NEVER 'carry' unless our Saviour gave us any reason to do so!!!
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
4,997
362
83
#7
I think it is their prerogative to do so, if they choose. Let the marketplace determine whether it was a right or wrong decision.

Personally, I think it will do little to no good to raise the age to 21 for so-called "assault weapons". I don't have a huge problem with it, but I don't think it will help. If a person under 21 wants one, let their mom or dad gift them with one. Same thing with handguns. My dad bought me my first revolver when I was 16 or 17... Ruger Blackhawk, .45 Colt.

If someone under 21 wants a shotgun, .22 rifle, deer rifle, etc, they can still buy it (if they are 18 or over). Not a big deal.

Yes, I know all about the "slippery slope" argument... I don't think this fits in that category.
 

Desdichado

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2014
7,506
177
63
#8
I support a business' right to sell to whomever they like with few qualifications. But this situation is a little different. They're taking these frankly useless measures as a result of external pressure in order to look socially responsible.



I think it is their prerogative to do so, if they choose. Let the marketplace determine whether it was a right or wrong decision.

Personally, I think it will do little to no good to raise the age to 21 for so-called "assault weapons". I don't have a huge problem with it, but I don't think it will help. If a person under 21 wants one, let their mom or dad gift them with one. Same thing with handguns. My dad bought me my first revolver when I was 16 or 17... Ruger Blackhawk, .45 Colt.

If someone under 21 wants a shotgun, .22 rifle, deer rifle, etc, they can still buy it (if they are 18 or over). Not a big deal.

Yes, I know all about the "slippery slope" argument... I don't think this fits in that category.
 
Last edited:

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
11,327
366
83
#9
Walmart and Dicks are hardly the first choice for purchasing firearms. All they want in sports is soccer moms buying shoes and clothes because that is were the profits are located. Not much margin on firearms. I hope this helps the small shops that are really qualified to sell firearms because they know their customers and really support the shooting sports.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Billyd

Senior Member
May 8, 2014
3,102
105
63
#10
If it would prevent immature crazies from getting a firearm, I'd be all for it. The truth is it won't do anything to keep firearms out of their hands.
 

Desdichado

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2014
7,506
177
63
#11
Oh yeah, the other day I saw a Glock Gen 3 for $600 at Dicks. C'mon.

What you describe is the free market at work. I'd be for this change if it were made under different circumstances.



Walmart and Dicks are hardly the first choice for purchasing firearms. All they want in sports is soccer moms buying shoes and clothes because that is were the profits are located. Not much margin on firearms. I hope this helps the small shops that are really qualified to sell firearms because they know their customers and really support the shooting sports.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Tommy379

Senior Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,179
209
63
#12
I've been a legal gun owner since 15..... haven't murdered yet.
 

Tommy379

Senior Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,179
209
63
#14
We wouldn't have expected it of you...we all know GUNS kill people :p
I've had 3 AR 15s layed out for the past two weeks. They haven't killed anyone yet.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
23,391
1,333
113
#15
You're 69 and you've lived your entire life without ever feeling the need to carry?
Did you ever see the 2002 movie Bowling For Columbine? In it, Michael Moore was gob smacked that in Canada, even big cities such as Toronto, you can walk up to people's houses, and the doors are not locked. Of course many people do lock the doors to their houses and cars and whatnot, especially at night, but the point he was making is that not everywhere else in the world is like America, where people not only feel a need to carry, but where it is actually illegal in some places not to own a firearm. God help us. I say this as a person who fully supports your second amendment :)

Here is what wiki says about who is legally prohibited from owning guns:

Persons are generally prohibited from purchasing a firearm if:

  • they have been convicted of a felony, or any other crime for which they could have been sentenced to more than a year in prison, or are under indictment for such
    [*]they are a fugitive from justice
    [*]they have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
    [*]they are an unlawful user of, or addicted to, controlled substances, including marijuana
  • they have been adjudicated mentally defective
  • they have been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
  • they have renounced their United States citizenship
 

Tinuviel

Senior Member
Jun 6, 2015
4,738
240
63
#16
I've had 3 AR 15s layed out for the past two weeks. They haven't killed anyone yet.
NO! How is this possible? (And, can I tag along on a range day?)
 

Tommy379

Senior Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,179
209
63
#17
NO! How is this possible? (And, can I tag along on a range day?)
I think my guns might be pacifist.

You are more than welcome to join me at my gun club. Play your cards right, I'll take you to the annual gun picnic.
 

abcdef

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
2,470
34
48
#18
I've had 3 AR 15s layed out for the past two weeks. They haven't killed anyone yet.
Without trigger locks? Not locked in a gun case? fully loaded? You have been with the guns all that time? Have they been left out when you were not there?

I trust that you did take some precautions.

-------

I think that some gun issues should be left to the states. Alaska is different than Chicago. In Alaska the bears will eat you, in Chicago the bears will just have another loosing football season.

But as a nation, we can make some decisions about who will obtain weapons of mass destruction. Cannons, machine guns, bombs, and chemical/ biological weapons should not be legalized as in the sale to the general public.

The issue of the age limit to own a gun should be left to the states.

------
 

Tommy379

Senior Member
Jan 12, 2016
6,179
209
63
#19
Without trigger locks? Not locked in a gun case? fully loaded? You have been with the guns all that time? Have they been left out when you were not there?

I trust that you did take some precautions.

-------

I think that some gun issues should be left to the states. Alaska is different than Chicago. In Alaska the bears will eat you, in Chicago the bears will just have another loosing football season.

But as a nation, we can make some decisions about who will obtain weapons of mass destruction. Cannons, machine guns, bombs, and chemical/ biological weapons should not be legalized as in the sale to the general public.

The issue of the age limit to own a gun should be left to the states.

------
No precautions, no fear.

And the age limit for ownership is left to the states. The federal law does not restrict ownership by age.
 

abcdef

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
2,470
34
48
#20
No precautions, no fear.

And the age limit for ownership is left to the states. The federal law does not restrict ownership by age.
I think that it is against federal law to posses a machine gun or fully automatic weapon no matter what your age, so there are federal gun laws.

Maybe these assault weapons should be added to the list. If we have laws against machine guns, what about assault rifles? They are close to the same.

I would think that as a law enforcement officer that you would rather not have these weapons easily available to people who oppose the laws of the land.

Peace Officers, God bless them, should NEVER have to face these types of weapons.

What can we do to keep our peace officers safer? Put these assault weapons into the same category as the machine guns.

Make them against the law? Or severely restrict them?

------