Are revolvers the most reviled of firearms available?

Now promoting teachers and kids being armed. Let’s arm everyone, without back ground checks cause after all, that infringes upon the natural rights of every humanoid with a movable thumb to have a gun.

You’re ignoring facts. More guns and fewer laws lead to more gun violence in states and democratic countries. You make no sense whatsoever. Your logic is completely undetectable. At least you know where this side stands.
Universal background checks on all gun transfers and only licensed carriers should possess weapons . You live in a world of contradiction.

We NEVER hear from Gun cults exactly what gun ownership entails....just confusion and fear, cause that’s what sells guns.

 

Yet more empty hyperbole, demonstrating both a complete absence of understanding the matter, and a complete disinterest for caring to understand the matter.

 

You support a story of arming kids so what do you expect ? Your confused little story lines have no coherence.

 

In the united states, can those under the age of twenty one legally purchase a handgun from a federally licensed firearms dealer, or obtain a concealed carry permit?

If not then the discussion does not pertain to arming minors, as is erroneously being claimed on the part of yourself. Those who can legally be armed are classified as adults under the law. Not kids, not children, not minors, and certainly not kindergarteners, but adults. Whether those adults be students, educators, or other staff members, it makes no difference in the discussion.

 

Thats a smoke screen. The student had a rifle. So an AR15 is OK to bring to school.

 

Was the act of bringing the AR-15 onto school grounds a violation of existing firearm-related restrictions? Or was it a wholly legal act for which neither school, nor law enforcement, possessed any authority to intervene on?

 

With a few exceptions, yes. Those exceptions include children/teenagers under a certain age, though we can debate about what that age is. However, whatever agreement we come to should apply to all "you have to be this old" restrictions we have, including military service, buying/owning firearms, buying and consuming alcohol, and any others I'm not thinking about. Another exception would be those convicted of violent felonies and domestic abuse, though I would it be part of their actual sentence, and not just a blanket ban for life for all offenses. My final exception would be people who are looney toons, but I have no idea how to find them and identify who is TOO looney toons to own a gun and how that line gets drawn. As an example, my wife already thinks I'm looney toons. (That's tongue in cheek, but in the real world with these new red flag laws, if she DID, I could find an officer at the door looking to confiscate my firearms without even having been given notice that the legal process had started, much less an opportunity to defend myself.)

 

Well, according to you, it’s still ok for a 10 year old to buy or borrow a hand gun from a family member or friend and bring it to school if all you’re going to rely on are federal laws. There is no federal requirement to show poof of age on any private purchase and you’re using that as your stipulation for arming kids at schools. Make up your mind....

 

Meaning that it is not actually possible for yourself to actually stay on topic, or even address a question that is presented to yourself. There is nothing on the part of yourself except hyperbole, and nonsensical off topic rambling, designed to lead the ill informed to believe that ten year olds are actually engaging in the private purchase of firearms.

Stay on topic, or refrain from taking part in the discussion.

 

Oh, now I’m the one who’s off topic because of the fallacy of you using a weak federal law to keep underaged kids from bringing a gun into school. Don’t you read your own posts ? You’re using a FEDERAL LAW to back your assertions. Firearm carry on school grounds are state laws. You’re all over the place. Which is it ? There are NO FEDERAL LAWS that require proof of age in private purchases. So, using your rational, it’s still ok for kids to bring both hand guns and AR15 s into schools.

 

Then let us get straight to the point to alleviate any further confusion.

All points being raised on the part of yourself, absolutely all of them, are devoid of not only any bearing relating to reality, but are also devoid of anything relating to actual merit in existing. There is nothing being presented on the part of yourself except for utter nonsense, hyperbolic exaggerations, complete fabrications, and delusional ramblings all being presented in a manner that would be laughed right out of the conspiracy theories section if it were presented there.

Nothing of substance has actually been presented on the part of yourself even once throughout this entire discussion. Whether this is due to your own decision to operate without your pre-selected script, or because those instructing you on what to say have not invested the time necessary to provide you with anything meaningful, is not presently known.

 

Another obviously fake intellectual argument. Do you actually know how wrong you are about everything you’ve been posting ?

 

No claim of actually being "right" has ever been made on the part of myself. It is not actually necessary for myself to be right in order to demonstrate both how and why others are wrong in their position, their presentation, and their argument. And since hyperbole is readily utilized on the part of yourself in these exchanges, a great deal of "wrong" is present on the part of yourself.

 

You used a federal law for age requirements for purchase of a hand gun from an FFL dealer to decide the legality of bringing a firearm into a school by a student. First, it does not address long guns and second, the federal law does not require proof of age in private firearm exchanges. How more exact can anyone be to show how ill informed you are ?

 

False. Not simply factually incorrect, but outright false.

Age requirements for the legal purchasing and carrying of handguns, and federal law which prohibits the possession of firearms within one thousand feet of a designated school zone, are two entirely different pieces of federal legislation, and cover two entirely different topics of discussion.

Cease the attempts at mixing and matching.

 

Your words. You’re defining who can carry guns into a school by using the federal purchase law.
Possession isn’t even defined in some states like a Texas. Kids like many other states, can possess handguns.....

 

Now you’re changing your tune.

 

False. Individual states are opting out of the federal prohibition on the carrying of firearms within individual school zones, as the law permits them to do so. The number of states where students and educators can legally carry a concealed firearm while on school grounds is increasing rather than decreasing. But in order to do such, the individual must first be able to legally purchase a handgun, meaning they must be at least twenty one years old.

Then actually go and prove such a nonsensical claim as being one of fact.

 

That’s called GUN CONTROL.
REGULATIONS define exceptions. This is why the send amendment is NOT. Absolute.

 

You’re all over the map. These exceptions are for Teachers and not students, except for colleges. Yore conflation all schools.
You’re really uninformed of SUCH.

 

Pray tell. Exactly what part of being at least twenty one years old, is not actually being understood on the part of yourself?

 

I have trouble understanding why you end all those statements with incorrectly placed reflexive pronouns in an attempt to sound like your right when you’re not. You still don’t seem to be able to distinguish federal from state laws.