Many of us have known and stated for years that federal gun laws (and many others) were unconstitutional. It does NOT take a constitutional lawyer to see that any law that restricts the freedom of 18-20 year olds is a direct and blatant violation of equal protection under the law.

As reported by the Washington Examiner – and amazingly, dozens of mainstream media outlets, including state-affiliated NPR – a federal judge in the State of Virginia has issued a 71-page ruling demeaning that the federal prohibition is unconstitutional – and therefore null and void.

In his ruling, Judge Robert Payne cited numerous other ways in which 18-20-year-olds are full citizens – “adults.” Military service (without parental approval), signing of contracts, serving on juries, and the constitutional (26th Amendment) right to vote in federal elections.

Of course, the current regime (dear Uncle Joe) argued long and hard, even claiming that various States (Alabama and Tennessee), in the era before the War Between the States, prohibited minors from owning handguns. (Of course, both those States also allowed slavery, and a good many other matters now regulated constitutionally.) The judge rejected the “compelling interest” argument as well, citing the 2022 SCOTUS decision overturning laws in Minnesota and Texas denying young adults the right to carry openly.

And most interesting, the judge did not accept the “it’s for the children” argument that “research shows us that 18- to 20-year-olds commit gun homicides at triple the rate of adults 21 years and older.”

That, friends, is a very good thing, since research also shows that American black people commit gun homicides (especially on each other) at a far higher rate than do white people or people of Asian descent. Else some administration (if not this one) would use this argument to deny the right to keep and bear arms to black Americans. Or to enrolled AmerInd Americans.

And of course the current regime will appeal this, indeed probably already have. And the screams of outrage and predictions of bloodbaths on the streets and in the schools are louder than ever. On top of the reactions after the mall killings in Texas and other highly-publicized events.

Does Judge Payne’s ruling go far enough? No, and for similar reasons. Except for the misguided and ultimately stupid and futile attempt by the royal governor of Massachusetts to disarm colonists in 1775, nothing can be found in Colonial or early United States law indicating that our right to keep and bear arms was ever restricted by requirements for background checks, proof of citizenship in a given State, denied because of certain convictions, or prohibitions on certain kinds of weapons.

Just as the mere fact that 18-20-year-olds have homicide rates 3 times higher than older people demonstrates that the federal law (the 1968 act) prevented those young people from acquiring and using handguns in crimes. It just prevented anyone trying to obey even unjust and unconstitutional laws being able to defend themselves, their families and communities with the best defense available. Vomiting, using a key-ring, pepper spray, or screaming loudly just does NOT seem to be a deterrent – and certainly being able to legally own and carry a handgun is in the compelling interest of people who might otherwise be victims – robbed, beaten, raped or even killed.

Now, let us ask about a few more stupid government actions where 18-21 year olds are robbed of their liberties:

1. 18-20-year-olds can have a CDL but cannot drive across state lines in a vehicle requiring a CDL.
2. 18-20-year-olds cannot buy tobacco products or even legally use them.
3. 18-20 year-olds cannot buy beverage alcohol or legally consume them.
4. In at least some states, 18-20-year-olds cannot buy over-the-counter cold medicine.
5. In some cities and states, people under age 21 cannot buy or own or carry many types of knives.

There are surely more restrictions, but these come to mind. Either obey the constitution, you politicians and bureaucrats, or get out and find a job – a real job.