A lawsuit with multiple plaintiffs. Danger Close Tactical is 1 store who is a plaintiff.  The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is also one. 

Good to see a mainland org getting involved in lawsuits.

Attorneys are people you're familiar with, Kevin O'Grady and Alan Beck are representing them.

Cliff note:
It is illegal for anyone under 21 to own or buy a firearm. This includes taking possession without the owner present (borrow).
It is illegal for anyone under 21 to buy ammo, unless they are going to use it at a range or for hunting.

Not part of the lawsuit but info relevant:

Federal law prohibits the buying of handguns from gun stores for those under 21, but OK ot buy rifle or shotguns.
Ok to be 18 to buy from private seller.
Ammo is 18 for rifle or shotgun ammo and 21 for handgun ammo.
Hawaii just passed the 21+ammo last year.

I had my hunting shotgun since I was 16.
The high school used to sell us kids in rifle club ammuntion for 70 cents per box.
I would have been about 16 yrs old.

Any law that restricts an act based solely on age should coincide with the legal age of majority, which is 18 in the US.  it's the age when a person can do these things without parental or guardian permission:

- enter into a binding contractual agreement
- enter the military
- marry
- vote in federal, state and local elections
- register for Selective Service
- change your legal birth name
- serve on a jury
- file a lawsuit
- create a last will and testament
- open a brokerage account & buy stock in your own name
- open a bank account on your own
- apply for credit cards
- buy real estate
- apply for a mortgage
- rent an apartment
- engage in pawn shop transactions
- get a Big Box membership of your own (Costco, Sam's Club, ...)
- file for bankruptcy
- control your own medical decisions
- give consent for vaccinations
- donate blood (may be 17 depending on state)
- designate yourself as an organ donor (may be 17 depending on state)
- obtain medical care at an ER (may be exceptions)
- purchase cough suppressants and other OTC meds
- use a meat slicer at your place of employment
- become a realtor
- become a notary public
- work in a bar/serve alcohol
- drive a cab
- get a commercial truck license
- work a full time job while attending school
- get body modifications
- travel without parents' consent (public transportation)
- purchase a lottery ticket
- buy alcohol outside of the US
- purchase a pet
- access adult XXX stores and content (yeah, I know ..)
- skydive
- book a room at a hotel
- buy fireworks
- bet on a horse race
- be free of curfew restrictions (some exceptions)
- buy spray paint
- be home alone to admit a service repairman into the home
- buy a car
- apply to locate biological parents
- adopt a child
- move out of parent's home without their permission
- obtain a driver's license without need to complete a driver's education course (most states)
- be arrested, tried and convicted as an adult

I'm sure there are more, but the point is, the age of majority is what ought to matter.  Any other age used to restrict a person's rights is inconsistent, capricious and arbitrary.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority

Brady Campaign a huge anti 2a organization is sending their director of litigation to represent the state in this lawsuit.

Update:

The state wants a stay, which means to put this lawsuit on hold until the 9th rules on a similar one.  This would mean that many years will go by until a result is made.

This means that HI wants to keep the law in place until then.  By then the plaintiffs would be over 21 and then HI will argue that this lawsuit is moot.  So the lawyers will need new plaintiffs. Which cost more time and money to do.  HI knows this.

The states expert is charging $750/hr and then $1,000/hr for in person testimony.

Majority if the states reply is using non bruen justification such as feelings and "studies".

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk