Trump Backs Tougher Background Checks, Raising Firearms Purchase Age to 21

In a move that came as something of a surprise Thursday morning, President Trump appeared to endorse more comprehensive background checks, as well as raising the legal purchasing age (whether of all firearms, or just AR15 style weapons wasn’t clear) to 21.  You can see the original tweet below.


The president also endorsed a bump stock ban, as well as a strong emphasis on mental health as part of these comprehensive background checks.

As of now, no concrete details of stricter regulation or proposed legislation have been made available, but we’ll be updating this as we get more details.

Our Take

Note: This is my personal take, not the overall position of Pew Pew Tactical, our owner/editor Eric, or anybody else that works here.  For me, less bad guys with guns sounds like a good thing, and I think steps in that direction that allow mentally-competent, law-abiding citizens to continue owning firearms are a good thing.  As far as bump stocks…these are devices with no real practical or defensive value, and they were created to skirt ATF regulations.

While I think an outright ban would be a step too far, I think regulating them under the NFA the same way we do full-auto lowers and trigger groups is certainly a valid way to keep them out of the hands of those who seek to harm others.  I think the purchasing age changes are (and I know I’m going to get hate mail for this) a good idea, provided it’s tempered with exceptions for sporting rifles and shotguns, as well as exemptions for Mil/LEO personnel between 18-21.  If we’re going to keep handguns the realm of the 21 and up, not to mention beer, I think AR15’s are perhaps fair game as well, but I’d love for you to convince me otherwise in the comments below!

Leave a Reply

4 Comments on "Trump Backs Tougher Background Checks, Raising Firearms Purchase Age to 21"

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

As a veteran, I’m a little disappointed that POTUS is considering raising the age. In effect, like with alcohol, you can defend (and possibly be wounded or killed in defense of) your country but can’t buy the civilian version of the weapon you used to do so. Is my logic an apples-to-apples comparison, though?

Chris N

Banning bump stocks is merely symbolic, since one can bump fire without one. It would be like banning potato peelers, but not knives. Anything to temporarily appease the hoplophobes I suppose.

Joe L

Personally, I feel that if it is just bump-stocks that get regulated, I think it will be okay. The potential for problems lies in the way the legislation is worded. If it is worded as “a fire-rate increasing device”, that could be interpreted as a number of things from aftermarket triggers, to lightweight BCGs, to muzzle brakes or compensators. My muzzle brake and Hiperfire trigger certainly allow me to fire more rapidly, and accurately.