TexasCHLforum.com

DParker wrote: Really? How odd then that the law was written with a penalty (albeit a lesser one) for providing the firearm even if the minor does not use it to commit a crime. That's a bit like inferring that the disparate penalties for stabbing someone who survives vs. stabbing someone who dies from the injury means that the state legislature did not intend for stabbing someone to be considered a crime.

No, I was pointing out that if the legislature was really concerned about the possession of firearms by minors they would either make it a crime in and of itself or make it more serious than a Class C misdemeanor. Again your analogy is lacking since stabbing someone is a criminal act and it being prohibited has nothing to do with how the knife is acquired and furthermore I'm pretty sure stabbing someone is more than a Class C misdemeanor.

Let me take a stab at this analogy game: Taxing of marijuana before it was outlawed. It was (is, actually) illegal to possess marijuana without a tax stamp, but they didn't give stamps, or made them prohibitively expensive. Was possession of marijuana illegal? No. Was there a legal way to possess it? No. Same thing with minors and dischargeable firearms: it is not illegal for a minor to possess the firearm, but there is no legal mechanism for a minor to acquire the gun in order to possess it in situations beyond those exempted in the statute that you cited. And as I tried to point out the law that makes the gaining access illegal only makes it a Class C misdemeanor, showing that the legislature was not terribly concerned with a minor who does not commit a crime getting access to a gun. And no, I'm not just comparing it to the penalty for a situation in which a crime is committed by the minor. In and of itself the fact that it is a Class C misdemeanor (no jail time, max $500 fine) shows that it is not a serious offense and it was not the intent of the legislature to ensure that no minor was ever given access to a firearm, thus they are not even attempting a backdoor prohibition on possession by minors.

One more thing-
Ok, I went ahead and looked up the federal law you cited and having read that code possession of handguns by minors would likely be allowed if written consent is given (and the minor has the written consent in his possession.) It might require some arguing about whether a course of instruction was underway, but then again, how often is that code enforced when no other crimes have been committed? I'd be willing to be close to never.

DParker wrote: As we see from the previous quote, you have misidentified the conclusion to which I've come. A minor does not need to be chargable with a criminal offense in order for there to be an age-based legal limit on something. If you give a 5 year-old an alcoholic drink and he is found by a LEO to be drinking it he will not be subject to being charged with anything. You, on the other hand, are not so lucky. Does this mean that there is no legal limit on the consumption of alcohol in TX? Of course not. The law prohibits many things for minors, but does not provide for criminal charges for those same minors. We tend to hold adults responsible in those cases.

Take a look at Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code Title 4 Section 106.04:

106.04a wrote:A minor commits an offense if he consumes an alcoholic beverage.

However there is no analogous statue pertaining to the possession of a firearm by a minor that I am aware of. It is not illegal. There is no regulation of it. How is this difficult to understand?

It makes no sense to take the fact that it is a Class C misdemeanor to make available a readily discharegable firearm to a minor to imply that there is a restriction of possession by minors. Besides, if a minor is legally carrying a handgun in a car under the current law (not considering traveling exemption) then it has to be concealed. Unless the minor has committed a crime or defended himself it will never be found and there will be no charge for anyone, and if the latter happens it is an exemption to the giving access, so again there will be no charges for anyone.

You are using common sense application of the law with your alcoholic beverage analogy to make your argument in which you then ignore common sense application of the law pertaining to firearm possession by a minor (i.e. that there was no intention to punish adults making a firearm available to a minor unless the minor commits a crime.) Give it up already.