ahhh – so you’re saying maybe there’s hope for us all? i’ll take it!
2 Likes
Texas…
2 Likes
2 Likes
Because it was in…Texas. Where EVERYONE is seemingly armed and all those guns are supposed to result in a polite society (?)
2 Likes
“An armed society is a polite society” because fear of getting shot enforces servile respect to anyone who is armed.
3 Likes
1 Like
no. an 18 year old can buy or be given a handgun so long as it’s not through a licensed dealer. ( because texas gun laws are insane. )
also not true. texas has no restrictions on possession.
mostly true. there are exceptions, but they probably don’t apply to them.
texas and the us are awash in guns. these situations are both the direct consequences of having such permissive laws, and entirely avoidable with better laws
6 Likes
Yes, you’re right. I forgot about that exception. 18-21 can buy a handgun from a private individual if they aren’t otherwise restricted. That’s Federal Law.
You can’t buy one from an FFL until 21.
Federal law says you have to be over 18 to posses a handgun. That doesn’t mean one couldn’t use it with supervision, but they can’t own/posses it outside of that. 18 USC §922 (x) (1), (5)
Correct, there are a handful of exceptions, but something tells me none of them apply to these gentlemen.
Maybe, but the question was “how was this allowed?” and even if two of them didn’t violate the law by how they got them, they still all violated other laws.
Something else I thought about later: I am sure Dunkin’ Donuts, like most companies, have a “No Weapons” policy for employees. Not a law, obviously, but it means it wasn’t “allowed”. Even if a crime wasn’t committed, it would lead to them being fired if they were found out sooner.
3 Likes
no, i was only correcting misinformation you provided.
and the consequences for the actual laws we have are entirely expected: high numbers of gun deaths – the leading cause of death for kids and teens.
i can answer it for you though. we “allow it” because there are no meaningful restrictions on buying or possessing guns. as i said, we are awash with them.
oh yeah, and things like this:
4 Likes
I know that “America runs on Dunkin’™”; but they don’t tell you just how much America Dunkin’ apparently runs on.
Huh? Two out of three were legal to carry, assuming they purchased through private sale or were gifted them.
Or are you making the Schrodinger’s Responsible Gun Owner argument, that everyone who has a gun is responsible up until the nanosecond they aren’t, when they suddenly become one of the criminals we need guns to protect ourselves from?
2 Likes
Dunkin’ Donuts slogan: America runs on Dunkin’
Dunkin’ Gun-nuts slogan: America runs from us.
2 Likes
“How was this allowed” was the question I was originally replying to, not your reply.
Thanks for correcting about the private sale/family gift exception.
So none of them could legally carry. There are a few exceptions to this having to deal with protective orders, which I highly doubt either of them were under.
Nope.
From @gatto’s link:
The Texas Department of Public Safety is no longer enforcing a state law that bars adults under 21 from carrying handguns
2 Likes
besides the fact the carry law isn’t enforced, “can’t carry” isn’t even the same thing as “can’t buy”, “can’t keep”, or “can’t transport” – so when should we expect that law enforcement ensure teenagers are acting lawfully?
when they leave their house? when they enter work? maybe stop and frisk on the street? without that level of commitment: “can’t” actually means “shouldn’t”. it’s the barn door when the horses (aka children) are dead.
sensible gun restrictions would avoid this whole question by restricting access to guns at large. making “can’t” actually mean “cannot”… because the guns are not accessible in the first place.
this would prevent society from being dependent on the sound decision making skills of children and teenagers.
3 Likes
Now you’ve gone and done it. Were all my efforts for naught?
By the way, this topic is still open if a new BS argument is inspired here:
5 Likes
isn’t it obvious that these teenagers are the worst of all criminals? you can tell because they bothered to get… checks notes… jobs. so of course it’s not the guns, just get rid of the criminals!
/s 
3 Likes
That’s better. I say get rid of the teenagers! That will help make the country safe for guns. /s
2 Likes
Yeah, I don’t know either. I don’t know all of the state laws off the top of my head, but I did do a search and found a Texas based lawyer page about Texas laws and that Texas gov. page before making my post. I generally remember the federal laws. It looks like the law for over 21 is still on the books, whether or not that is being enforced, I dunno. From that same article:
The recent DPS memo will “control the conduct of DPS officers,” he said. “It does not apply to any police department, any sheriff’s department, any constable. They all have to make their own decisions on how they’re going to enforce it.”
So, if past history of policing is any guideline, selectively enforced when the “wrong people” are caught with one. 
When should we expect law enforcement to ensure anyone is acting lawfully? People every day violate laws, mostly traffic laws, and they either don’t get caught or it isn’t enforced.
Enforcement of these and other laws is usually after a law has been broken and they are caught, or there is a chance encounter where cops poke around and finds and enforces violations. Gun laws, drug laws, license and registration of your car laws - there is what is “legal” and “allowed” to do, and what people “get away with” because policing isn’t proactive (and most of the time when it is, like stop and frisk, it is violating civil rights.)
Yes, you could say most laws are “shouldn’t” rather than “can’t” because they won’t usually take any action until after you commit a crime, then the cops notice and arrest you.
So I don’t disagree with your point, but that wasn’t the question I was initially responding to.
Ok.
i certainly couldn’t say so, because it’s not true.
for example, this is why we take driver’s licenses and cars away from unsafe drivers; require licenses and training; have safety standards for car production; restrict what kind of cars can be bought and sold; etc. it’s not perfect, but every such gate helps makes driving safer. and cars aren’t designed to kill
the initial post you wrote provided several (incorrect) shouldn’t’s, and not a single cannot. until we have the cannot, these situations will happen again and again. endlessly.
other countries aren’t asking nicely. they’ve taken action, and stopped this bs from being able to happen.
thank god. agreement.
now if we can start getting other gun folks on this same page, we’ll finally stop having so many people in the usa affected by gun violence.
3 Likes
