Our youths don’t need access to assault weapons. Let’s put politics aside

By Jerald McNair for Chicago Tribune

December 7, 2022

CHICAGO - Despite one’s position on gun control, or their political party affiliation, I hope most will agree that anyone under 21 years of age should not have access to assault weapons or high-capacity ammunition magazines.

There are many that state, if you can vote, join the military, and essentially die for your country, you should not be precluded from purchasing these weapons. As someone who served in the military for nine years, part of me understands why someone would take that position.

However, I must balance that inclination with what I saw in the military, working with young troops, what I have seen educating our youths and what researchers and medical experts say about brain development and maturity.

My years in the service were some of the best of my life. While I loved this country, I too wanted to become more disciplined. As I trained and developed my skills, I saw young troops — many of whom were under 21 — struggle with following rules when they first joined. The range of issues included a lack of emotional maturity or a will to simply rebel. Many of them needed the support of their superiors to help develop their sense of understanding about military life.During those early years, I would often ask myself: What kind of person would this individual be had it not been for the military? This is not an effort to recruit for the military. It is recognition, however, that even though one may be able to join the military, it does not mean that individual is mature enough to be able to make some rather significant decisions in life.

The military, similar to schools, provide an umbrella of protection for youths. While they do not absolve youths of their responsibility, those institutions are able to discipline and hopefully correct poor behavior. Adults serving as NCOs — noncommissioned officers — in the military, and teachers and administrators in schools, act as surrogate parents, in some respects, to help youths regulate and improve their decision-making.

In fact, the law recognizes this in schools, under the Latin term, “in loco parentis.” It means, “In place of the parent.” It essentially gives schools and teachers some responsibility to look out for the best interests of students, like the parents.

When a student is seen making poor decisions, the school can dole out fair consequences and interventions to hopefully help the student make better decisions. However, when that same individual is not in school, and not with that parent, who is able to intervene — besides law enforcement — to help? The answer is no one.

Most students graduate from high school by the age of 18 or 19. The number of disagreements, skirmishes, and arguments that some high school students engage in are limitless. With the vast majority of youths having access to social media, simple differences become magnified and are exacerbated when others chime in. The individuals involved can become emboldened and decide to either let it go or escalate it. This could result in them gaining hold of a weapon. If a federal ban is not put in place that precludes those under 21 years of age from buying an assault-style weapon, those rather innocuous altercations may result in school shootings and the deaths of many.

Through it all, as we discuss these laws, and weigh the rights of individuals with the need to keep our communities safe, it’s important that we recognize that times are different. Technology and social media platforms have changed the minds and viewpoints of many of our youths. These influences can impair the decisions of some of our youths, particularly our males.

Emotional maturity during the teenage years varies. Split second decisions can impact an individual’s life forever. A ban on assault-style weapons for those under 21 may go a long way in curbing school shootings and crimes in communities. Data from the FBI reveals that from 2000 to 2019, in nearly half of the shooting incidents at educational facilities, the offender was younger than 18. If legislation had been enacted before, perhaps shootings in Uvalde, Texas, and Highland Parkalong with others may have never taken place.

So, as states and local communities across the country grapple and debate gun control legislation, let’s help our youth as they mature into adulthood. It’s important that we all understand that the decisions our youths make are often not the same choices they will make as they grow older. Currently, seven states have raised the purchase age for semi-automatic weapons. Hopefully, the rest will follow. Our youth need us to work together on this, notwithstanding our political party affiliation.

Whether you are for or against gun control, a Democrat or Republican, at least don’t let those under 21 buy assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines. After all, we want our youth to have long and productive lives.