WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

360

A lot of these shooters are under the age of 21, very immature and emotionally undeveloped. They are just kids and the amount of growth between 18 and 21 can and often is substantial. I think this would actually prevent fairly large percentage of these mass shootings. For this to be dealt you must also raise the age of military consent to 21. Raising the age of firearms purchase while still expanding children to go kill in war at 18 is asking too much. If the age of both was raised to 21 I would support it.

A lot of these shooters are under the age of 21, very immature and emotionally undeveloped. They are just kids and the amount of growth between 18 and 21 can and often is substantial. I think this would actually prevent fairly large percentage of these mass shootings. For this to be dealt you must also raise the age of military consent to 21. Raising the age of firearms purchase while still expanding children to go kill in war at 18 is asking too much. If the age of both was raised to 21 I would support it.

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

Nah, but I do think gunstores making it a policy to have a cosigner on under 21's might be wise, workshop it to make sure it's not infringing on the constitution or giving lefties a good wedge for practical gun control obviously.

When I say cosigner I don't mean someone to share explicit legal or financial liability, it's shorthand, I mean that you just need somebody that a clerk at a gunstore can say yeah you know the kid and say he's good? good enough.

I'm sure there are a number of ways to implement this and make it highly infringing so I too would be skeptical if anybody took me up on it.

To be clear, solving the underlying problems in our society is my preference here, but a gunstore asking for a background check on an 18 year old is always going to come up blank unless they are a perpetual crime machine, so a character witness saying "he's a good kid" doesn't seem like such a leap to me.