I harbor a strong distaste for the hypocrisy that has walked among us as far back as I can remember, and much further, I’m sure. Hand in hand with sanctimony, it’s difficult to ignore, sometimes impossible to refrain from pointing out, and almost always shielded from reproach by the narcissists for whom it is a staple tool in life.

That’s why I like to kick hypocrisy when it’s down, I mean, really work it over, especially when it comes to defending the Second Amendment, because, let’s face it, if you’ve read a lot of my articles, you know that suffering foolishness isn’t my strong suit. Today, I’m going to focus on a subject I’ve written about several times recently, and that is the disparity of gun rights as applied to young adults 18-20 years of age. 

This incongruity has existed for a long time, specifically since the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) banned adults ages 18-20 from being able to purchase a handgun through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). Unchecked hypocrisy leading to more of the same, as bad ideas tend to breed worse ones, many dumpster fires that still fancy themselves American states have doubled down on this nonsense, requiring citizens to be 21 or older to purchase any firearm. 

However, this article is more about the good news, as trending decisions in courtrooms throughout the country are correcting course on this hypocrisy. I recently wrote about Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signing a measure into law that lowers handgun ownership, possession, and carry permit age to 18, like all other firearms sold in the state. I also wrote about the United States Supreme Court refusing to hear Minnesota’s appeal on an Eighth Circuit ruling in Worth v. Jacobson, which highlighted the state’s obligation to present evidence of a suitable historical analogue that demonstrates the government is permitted to disarm individuals who threaten the safety of themselves and others, ultimately ruling the age restriction inconstitutional in light of New York State Pistol & Rifle Association, Inc. v. Bruen. 

“Minnesota has failed to show that 18 to 20-year olds pose such a threat,” wrote Judge Duane Benton in the Eighth Circuit’s decision. 

But it doesn’t end there, as additional lawsuits have been filed in other states seeking judicial recognition of 18 to 20-year-olds as among “the people” whose right to keep and bear arms is protected. In February, Escher v. Noble was filed in Massachusetts, challenging a ban on the possession and carrying of handguns and semiautomatic firearms by adults under the age of 21. Similarly, Pennsylvania’s prohibition of concealed carry among 18 to 20-year-olds is currently being challenged in Young v. Ott before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

In January, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1) and (c)(1), forbidding FFLs from selling handguns to 18 to 20-year-olds, was a violation of the Second Amendment, repeatedly citing law review articles that determine young adults to be among “the people” protected by the Second Amendment during America’s Founding.

Even Florida, a state that I like to consider among the more Constitutionally mindful places to live, is in damage control mode, as knee-jerk legislation of the past has returned to haunt the state. In March, a foolish en banc panel of the Eleventh Circuit decided 8 to 4 to uphold a state ban on firearm purchases by adults under 21, only to have the rug pulled out from under them by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who announced that his office would not seek to defend the law if the challenge was presented for further review by the Supreme Court. This is an excellent strategy to undermine activist judges at the state and circuit level, which may draw the support of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, the Florida AG at the time who ironically pushed for the law when it was initially enacted.

After my aforementioned articles were published about Iowa and Minnesota, I received many messages asking if I really thought it was a good idea to allow 18 to 20-year-olds to purchase, possess, and carry firearms. My first response is that it doesn’t matter what I think. It is a natural right recognized by the United States Constitution as a Founding principle of this nation. Second, I don’t believe that is the question we should be asking. Instead, we need to ask where we are failing as adults, parents, communities, media, and the government when it comes to teaching the youth of America about our values and responsibilities as a nation of law-abiding gun owners. Personally, I have my reservations when it comes to the latter two institutions, as I feel confident that the media and government have long since been in cahoots, and that rather than taking up the mantle of education and obligation to the Second Amendment, they have reveled in the violence as a means to stand atop the graves of victims and use them as a bully pulpit to manipulate and indoctrinate the sheep that inevitably follow.