Federal Appeals Court Upholds Colorado Ban On Gun Sales To Young Adults, Raising 2nd Amendment Concerns

A recent decision by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has reignited the debate over gun rights and age restrictions, as the court upheld Colorado’s law prohibiting firearm sales to individuals under 21. The law, Senate Bill 23-169, was initially blocked by a lower court due to concerns about constitutionality, but the appeals court has reversed that decision, allowing the law to take effect.

The court’s decision has sparked strong reactions from both sides of the gun rights debate. U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Federico, writing for the three-judge panel, argued that the law does not infringe on the Second Amendment because it only imposes a condition on commercial sales. According to Federico, the age restriction aligns with the Supreme Court’s ruling in cases like District of Columbia v. Heller, which permits certain regulations on firearm sales.

Supporters of the law believe it serves as a public safety measure, especially considering recent firearm-related incidents involving young adults. They argue that restricting gun access for those under 21 may reduce impulsive acts of violence, citing studies suggesting that impulse control continues developing until the early twenties. The state of Colorado claims that this measure aligns with historical precedents for firearm regulation.
Gun rights advocates, however, see the ruling as an erosion of constitutional protections.

Organizations like Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) argue that young adults legally considered adults should retain the right to purchase firearms. RMGO maintains that the Second Amendment’s protection extends to all adults and that this law unfairly targets a specific age group, which they argue is discriminatory and inconsistent with recent Supreme Court rulings.

For critics, the decision disregards the principle that all adults should have the right to “keep and bear arms.” They point to the fact that 18-year-olds are trusted to vote, pay taxes, and serve in the military but are now barred from purchasing firearms for self-defense. This decision, they say, undermines the spirit of the Second Amendment.

RMGO has vowed to challenge the ruling, with plans to appeal potentially to the Supreme Court. Gun rights advocates are hopeful that the higher court will consider the case, potentially setting a new precedent for age-based firearm restrictions.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR