Judge tosses NRA lawsuit about 18 year olds buying handguns

[Heartland Patriot]

...I'm not believin' that ALL constitutuional rights don't apply to minors, with parental override (search within parents' home)...and yet they give them to illegal aliens and terrorists and other critters...we've gone a looooooooooooong way from what the US was known for...hard and fair justice...to the point that the ONLY ones who get justice through the system are the bad guys...and the thumb on our necks gets heavier by the day...

Apparently, minors have a constitutional right to an abortion, even though it is not enumerated..... but they do not have the right to keep and bear arms, which is enumerated.

This is not what I signed on for. Stop the ship of state. I want off.

TAM, the most important fact about this is that, by just about any other legal standard, 18-20 year olds are ADULTS, not minors. They can vote...they can get a drivers license without doing anything but taking the test and paying the fees...they can be tried as an adult for crimes...they can serve in the military (and young men MUST sign up for Selective Service Registration). But they cannot drink a beer, and they cannot buy handguns...the rights and the responsibilities go hand in hand, don't they?

[mmestx]

Just a quick question. If the judge had ruled in favor of 18 year olds being able to buy handguns would that only affect his courts jurisdiction? Furthermore, by tossing the lawsuit and having it appealed, would the appellate court have a larger jurisdictional area? So, idealy, we would want this lawsuit to go up to the supreme court so that the decision would affect the whole country, correct?

[G.A. Heath]

Just a quick question. If the judge had ruled in favor of 18 year olds being able to buy handguns would that only affect his courts jurisdiction? Furthermore, by tossing the lawsuit and having it appealed, would the appellate court have a larger jurisdictional area? So, idealy, we would want this lawsuit to go up to the supreme court so that the decision would affect the whole country, correct?

If we had won that case in that court and assuming that there would be no follow up appeal from the government that ruling would only have applied to the plaintiff(s). A good strategy for the defense in that case would have been not to appeal in order to avoid a precedent setting ruling at the appellate level which would kill the case and require that we start a new one in order to get what we want.