Rampage
Member
One reason offered for opposing increasing the minimum age requirement from 18 to 21 is that it would deny the Constitution's Second Amendment right to citizens age 19 or 20.
But does the Constitution say Constitutional rights can be denied, blocked from citizens that are 17 years old?
There are familiar emotion based arguments on both sides of this debate.
Does either side have the advantage of logical or legal validity?
But does the Constitution say Constitutional rights can be denied, blocked from citizens that are 17 years old?
There are familiar emotion based arguments on both sides of this debate.
Does either side have the advantage of logical or legal validity?