Connect with us


Consistency matters: Why we shouldn’t create a second class



Many Republicans are caving into leftist pressure in regards to the Second Amendment. Among the popular grounds from which Republicans are caving is raising the gun buying age to 21. Both Trump and Rick Scott are among the cavers. The belief behind raising the minimum age to 21 is centered on the premise that 18 years-olds cannot think clearly. The biggest fact cited to support this is the whole thing about the brain not being fully developed until 25.

Inconsistencies Rampant

The age of consent varies state to state as does a drivers license. The age to vote is 18. The age to buy cigarettes is also 18 except for a few states that raised the age to 19, and California is 21. Nonetheless one can enter into a contract at 18, watch porn at 18 (a meaningless age barrier with the internet), and get married at 18. Getting married is probably the most adult thing an 18 year old can do. A person can enlist in the military at 18 and men must register for the draft at said age. At 21 you can purchase alcohol, marijuana, and handguns. There is no consistency in our country when it comes to the rights of young adults. The government legislates them as they see fit.

Brain Development

If the premise for alcohol and firearms is the development of the human brain, then the age should be mid-twenties. If brain development is what qualifies a person to make responsible cognitive decisions, why are the most meaningful decisions a person can make, the earliest rights a person receives? Voting, marriage, and military service are three of the most meaningful choices a person can make. I agree that voting isn’t as meaningful, but in our political system, voting is a trusted right to citizens. Alcohol and marijuana are the most trivial of these and are restricted to 21. Handguns are restricted to 21.

Perhaps the person with this argument would specify a level of danger as a premise for denying the “underdeveloped” human rights. Again we see a problem here. Alcoholism is dangerous but not inherent. Small amounts can be beneficial, but alcohol is far safer than cigarettes which you can purchase three years earlier in life. Marijuana, by every metric, is safer than cigarettes and alcohol by most. Military service has the risk of death. Are eighteen-year-olds developed enough for the military? Because how can they be if they aren’t developed enough for the rifles they will be assigned? This argument falls apart at the inconsistencies. Perhaps one would argue that the inconsistencies are flaws in the system that were not implemented using “brain development”, which isn’t true in many of these.

Young adults aren’t developed enough to purchase a firearm but we’ll let them, and push them to, go into debt to attend glorified summer camps to maybe achieve a certificate that says you are somewhat qualified for a job.

Brain Deterioration

If we gain rights due to brain development, the logical flow follows that we should then lose rights as our brains deteriorate. The premise of using brain development follows that cognitive optimization is essential to being trusted and endowed, by the state, certain inalienable rights. As we humans age, our brains shrink. Our memory and quickness become fade. And these are mild compared to degenerative diseases out there. If brain development is the standard than many old people should lose their “majority” status and accompanying rights. The old politician seeing this argument would then respond that “brain development is tied to mature decision making.” But do our young people act irrationally due to biology or culture? I counter with two examples:

Example 1: Chicago

Chicago’s crime should come as a shock to no one. It’s an overused talking point. Chicago not only reaps an atrocious body count but much of the of crime committed is by young offenders. 2011 data shows that 53% of homicide offenders were between the ages of 17-25. The “fully developed 26-35 year olds were 26% of the convicted. What’s unique is that Chicago is above average when it comes to young people committing murder. But it’s not just offenders, it’s also the victims who are young. Compared to other cities, Chicago is an outlier for youth violence. Not being able to trust youth with a gun would reasonably have far more to do with underlying cultural issues instead of brain development. But I’m sure blaming Indiana will solve all of Chicago’s problems… Point being, unless we are to assume that minorities are inferior, which I don’t, I remain steadfast in contending that the poor decision making of America’s troubled youth is far more correlated to cultural issues (fatherless homes, political corruption, big government etc.) than an underdeveloped brain.

Example 2: Alcohol

I raise the argument that denying rights to young adults is bad for the general welfare of our population. Restrictions upon young adults have only worsened our culture and the health of young adults. Pushing the age off alcohol to 21 has rendered, decades later, rampant alcoholism among young people. According to Addiction Resource Approximately 20% of college students meet the medical criteria for having an Alcohol Use Disorder, which includes alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence. Not all college students who binge drink end up becoming alcoholics, but they are only a step or two away from developing alcoholism, also known as alcohol dependence. Since like to do comparisons with Australia and Switzerland with guns, how are all these other countries with alcohol? Turns out the countries with the most alcoholics are former communist states, uncorrelated with the legal age, of which the US is among the highest. It’s not a faulty analogy to point out that the alcohol at 21 age discrimination has yielded no empirical benefits (reduced drunk driving deaths have many other factors) while enabling a youth worship of the bottle. Good job politicians…

Prolonged Adolescence

Prolonged adolescence is one of the biggest threats to our culture and perhaps our economy. Adolescence was largely a 20th-century invention, whereby society created a period between childhood and adulthood. Teenagers always existed but at what point should adults be treated as, and act like adults? They graduate high school, go to college while not working except when on break. This is a general state of many college students, with the addition of underage drinking. What enables our youth to be so lackadaisical? Young people aren’t treated like adults, therefore do not act like them. We don’t hold young people to higher standards because we can’t trust them. So they carry on adolescence. The partial blame goes to the politicians who regulated the ages between 18-21, the notorious years for prolonged adolescence.

Age of Majority

When rights are protected at the age of majority, those at the arbitrary age selected are entitled to equal protection as those well above the arbitrary protections. This is a consistent platform for all rights to be protected. This is the most logically defensible solution. The age of majority is not only fair, it is beneficial to our culture as a whole.

Continue Reading


  1. Don McCullen

    March 1, 2018 at 11:14 pm

    Awesome piece Ray!!! Well said.

  2. ed

    March 2, 2018 at 1:22 am

    Well said Ray !

    Though I’m against Trump’s “National Military Parade” idea for a number of issues, if he DOES succeed in squandering the time & money of the military in such a useless exercise, I hope we get to see the soldiers marching down the street carrying broomsticks instead of rifles and frequent explanations by the press narrators is that the broomsticks are the Military replacement for the rifles that the soldiers are too young and not trusted by their Commander-in-Chief to carry because those carrying broomsticks are under 21 and will therefore be shouting “bang bang” at their foes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


An open letter to MAGA – Read it all



Before I get started let me say this first….

MAGA Patriots

I truly believe that the vast majority of you who supported Trump from day one are patriots. You’ve seen the devastating effects of liberal policies of our nation, but you knew you couldn’t trust the GOP because they were no better. I didn’t vote for Trump, but have tried to be an honest broker about him. I don’t think those of you who voted for him are “dumb hicks” or “uneducated rednecks.” I get his appeal. I really do. I disagreed with you that electing him was a good idea, but that doesn’t mean I think you aren’t patriots who believe in conservative values of limited government, freedom, liberty, life, and the pursuit of happiness. The fact is most of you are patriots. The few that aren’t are just lunatics, but every group has its lunatics. Of course in this case I’m speaking of the “alt-right.” True conservatives know that racism and anti-Semitism has no place in our nation or in our hearts. So, I ask that you read this whole letter, and let me say what I have to say, and please take it in the spirit in which it’s intended.

The Good

This may be tough to read for many of you who have supported Trump wholeheartedly from the beginning, but I think that many of you may now finally be receptive to it. I’ve tried to be an honest broker on Trump. I didn’t vote for him. I didn’t think he’d win. I’ve praised him when he did something I thought was good, and I’ve criticized him when he did what I thought was wrong. I’ve tried to call balls and strikes all throughout his presidency.

I haven’t cared about the Russia probe simply because I assume everyone in Washington is working for someone, and it’s never us. I don’t care about Stormy Daniels because it was years before he was President and it was consensual. He hasn’t been a moral man, but that’s not why I didn’t vote for him. I didn’t vote for him because he’s a lifelong liberal. You’ve heard this before, but many of you are paying attention now.

He’s done better than I ever imagined. However, that’s because I had such low expectations. I honestly thought we’d end up with a SCOTUS nominee to the left of Garland. He chose Gorsuch, but in retrospect that was probably just as a bone to his base. Donald Trump had no real guiding principles. He only cares about certain things, and those things aren’t conservative for the most part.

I honestly thought we wouldn’t get any tax cuts, but we did, because he cares about that. He wanted a corporate tax cut, which we desperately needed for our economy, but he wanted it for himself. He cares about tariffs, but so did Bernie Sanders. Tariffs aren’t good for the economy. They work counter to a free market. They sound good for an “America First” policy, but they’ve never worked.

The Bad

Now those of you who have supported Trump unequivocally are starting to see the light with this massive omnibus bill. It funds Planned Parenthood. It funds sanctuary cities. It funds Obamacare. It doesn’t fund the wall, which was the centerpiece of his election promises. None of this should really come as a real surprise. He said it all during the campaign.

“Planned Parenthood does many good things.”

“We’re going to build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it.” Well, if Mexico isn’t paying for it, I guess that means no wall?

“I am a deal maker.” Well, he’s made a deal alright. Not a very good one. All he’s gotten in exchange is an excess of military spending that we don’t need and can’t afford as I wrote about a couple months back.

I’m sure there are many of you screaming at the computer screen right now, maintaining that the President is “playing 14 dimensional chess.” Come on. You’re just deluding yourself at this point. I’m not saying Donald Trump is the worst President ever. But stop saying he’s the best President ever either. The fact is we really don’t know a President’s quality until they’ve been out of office for 30 years, so it’s silly to make those claims anyway.

The Ugly

I’m not here to say “I told you so,” but I did know this day would eventually come, even though I hoped I was wrong.

I’m sorry, folks, but you’ve been sold out.

Trump didn’t plan on winning, and now that he has he is ramming through the few things he cares about. Immigration isn’t on the list of things he cares about. He’s hired illegals for many years, so this shouldn’t come as a shock. He DID know that it was an issue we cared about though, and he knows marketing. He got the nomination talking about it in very simplistic terms, even though he simply co-opted the ideas of others such as Ted Cruz and Scott Walker.

Further, the President is far too quick to jump to the left on issues like gun control, because that’s where his heart is. All of his properties are “gun-free,” even those that aren’t required to be by state law. This should have been a warning sign to all 2nd-Amendment advocates.

He’s also a proponent of single-payer healthcare. “Everyone is going to be covered, and the government is going to pay for it,” he said during the campaign.

The Way Forward

I am not, not, NOT advocating a return to the days of RINOs. The likes of Bill Kristol, Rick Wilson, and Tom Nichols will laugh and say “see, we told you so!!” Well, they’re in no position to do so. They were pushing Jeb and Kasich. We’d have been worse off today if we’d gone that route. We can drain the swamp and fight the liberal GOP establishment, but this time we need to consider doing it with a proven conservative, not a lifelong liberal who became a Republican 2 minutes before he declared he was running for President. There are a few out there. Not many, but a few. We have to vet them vigorously.

And then comes the hard part. We have to hold them accountable. We can’t join cults. It’s a natural thing to do, to become a fan. What’s funny is I saw people make fun of the “Trump Cult” while being in the Rubio Cult, or the Rand Paul Cult. Cults of personality are BAD. No one is perfect. Everyone, especially politicians, have their faults. We have to be mindful of that.

It might be time to consider a primary challenge to the President. And NO, I do NOT mean John Kasich or Jeff Flake. We’ll have to think that one over, but let’s take some time to digest and think things over. We’ve all had a tough couple of days. Let’s think things through. I imagine after this omnibus spending bill betrayal the GOP has doomed itself this midterm cycle, and Donald Trump has guaranteed he will be a one-term President. He won with fewer votes than Romney lost with, so he was going to need people like me to vote for him in 2020. He was on a good path to making that happen. He’s lost it now. I imagine he’s lost many of his staunchest supporters too.

You’re all great Americans. God Bless.




Continue Reading


Dear Illinois Conservatives, what is the Repubican Party accomplishing for you?



Excuse me if I come off sounding like Steve Deace. I don’t mean to. However, when I elaborate on how bad the Republican Party of Illinois is, I also offer a solution. My solution is to consider joining the Federalist Party movement. Because honestly, what do you have to lose?

The 2018 Illinois Primary should be a wakeup call as Conservatism suffered defeat after defeat. The only two salvageable victories were Douglas Bennett in the 10th and David Merkle in the 2nd. Both of these candidates are longshots in November. There were also a couple of conservatives who won because they ran unopposed, Jitendra “JD” Diganvker in the 8th and Bill Fawell in the 17th. JD is a longshot, though District 17 isn’t lost yet.

District 3 Fail

Avowed neo-nazi, Author Jones won the nomination because he ran unopposed. This was the biggest headline for the GOP in Illinois. A neo-nazi is now their candidate. What is also highly disappointing is that the Republican Party had a chance to win this race in November. This is the race where the Democrats were engaged in a civil war of sorts. Socialist, Marrie Newman challenged Daniel Lipinski. If Marrie Newman had won, the District may swing red due to Newman’s socialism. But Lipinski held on, likely due to the open primary system. The GOP just sat back and allowed its own defeat in District 3. They failed to step up and challenge Jones. Is there no establishment or leadership there? Leadership would have been fielding a candidate to first ensure that a neo-nazi will not carry the torch. But instead, the GOP facilitated its own defeat.

RINO Victories Rampant

I do applaud Bennett for his victory in the 10th, but I do recognize that he won, in large part, because the two well-funded RINOs saw fit to hammer each other. Through their big money, they lost their appeal through mudslinging and robocalls. The less funded, but more conservative candidate was able to sneak a 259 vote win over the pro-abortion Jeremy Wynes. The other RINO, Sapan Shah was a close third place. But looking at the other races, RINOs came out on top when head to head with a Conservative. Preston Nelson, a strong libertarian, was no match for the RINO incumbent Mike Bost. The more formidable James Marter still lost handily to incumbent Adam Kinzinger. The largely criticized incumbent governor, Bruce Rauner, still prevailed over Jeanne Ives. Bruce Rauner, by the way, signed a sanctuary state law. So come election day in November, leftist will have two of them to vote for. And Conservatives will only vote for a party that does not represent, in their state, a limited government nor the US Constitution.

As stated by Real GOP Illinois

Bruce Rauner was always a liberal. He was never a conservative. We question whether Rauner was ever really a Republican or if he just saw an opportunity to buy the Illinois Republican Party for his own enrichment and the enrichment of his elite friends. Who has profited from Bruce Rauner? Let’s start naming names.

The Illinois GOP has no interest in a limited government. It has no interest in responsible immigration laws. It does not seek to protect the 2nd Amendment. It does not believe in protecting the unborn. How can they? They’re too busy fielding rich leftist candidates to pass on to the loyal opposition to the state’s Democratic majority. Sapan Shah, Jeremy Wynes, John Morrow all rich leftist who infiltrated the GOP ranks to garner the nomination. They failed, but Mike Bost, Adam Kinzinge, Rodney Davis, John Shimkus, are all blatant RINO incumbents representing their respective districts. Then there’s the crooked John Elleson who won the 9th.

Compared to other Blue States

I live in Maryland. I know very well what it’s like to live under a super-majority of Democrats. I know the futility of opposition. But remarkably, the Maryland GOP isn’t all that bad or at least it’s gotten better. Andy Harris, the state’s lone Republican Congressman on the Eastern Shore, is a solid conservative. Governor Larry Hogan is one of the nation’s most popular governors. He has done as well as a conservative seeking reelection in a blue state can do.

In California, there are solid conservatives running. We’ve interviewed them here on NOQ Report. See Erin CruzShastina Sandman, and Dr. Ken Wright. There is also Konstantinos Roditis a Republican but a solid constitutional conservative federalist running for Controller in California.

The Illinois GOP does not have the same interest or ambition as the other blue states. So what is the point of the Illinois GOP? It is incapable of representing and advancing small government conservatism.

A New Party

For Conservatives in Illinois, it’s time for a new party. Part of the Illinois GOP’s issue is that the GOP platform is meaningless to them. The Federalist Party addresses this exact problem

Over time, the Federalist Party will address issues in a way that is very different from other parties. Platforms today are essentially meaningless. There is no accountability for politicians within the parties. They’re able to act any way they wish. As long as they can confuse the electorate during campaign season, their adherence (or lack thereof) to the party’s platform can be disregarded.

They offer an intricate solution that not only allows some dissension but provides transparency. Read more about their solutions here. The goal of the Federalist Party is to prevent the corruption of ideals that has taken place in the Illinois GOP and the Republican Party as a whole. Give it some thought. In the meantime what have you to lose?

Continue Reading


Breaking: survivors are experts on everything



We were told that survivors of the horrific shooting in Parkland, Florida, knew more about gun violence than we ever could.

We were told that their suffering made them experts.

We were told that we couldn’t scrutinize their claims, either because they’re children or because to do so would demean their suffering as survivors of an unspeakable tragedy.

In short, we were told they were off limits.

I can understand granting leniency to grieving survivors. People should be left alone to mourn. But once they take to the podium to push an agenda, they become public figures, and public figures are subject to public scrutiny.

In addition to that, I care nothing about the fact that the Parkland activists are children. Their youth will not stand as Kevlar in the public sphere. If they want to take the stage with adults, receive the right to vote as adults, and lobby for legislation like adults, then I’m going to evaluate, criticize, and tear apart their arguments exactly the way I would for an adult who said such embarrassingly idiotic things.

To do any less essentially concedes permission for insufferable ignoramuses like David Hogg and Cameron Kasky to continuously spread lies and malicious attacks against Dana Loesch, conservatives, and an organization whose sole mission is to defend a constitutional right.

More importantly, once these survivors are handed an open mic on gun control, they’ll feel justified and even obligated to sound off on other topics they know equally little about.

As seen in an official Twitter interview on Monday, David Hogg has apparently graduated from his factless tirade against firearms to a more encompassing position as shaman supreme for identity politics. To name just a few examples, Hogg flaunted his virtue-based expertise on white privilege, the patriarchy, college debt, healthcare, and net neutrality. He insisted that the underrepresentation of women and minorities in government is responsible for the lack of diversity of thought in politics, that the NRA is turning America into a dictatorship with its dirty money, that the political elite only want people in retirement homes voting, that Bernie Sanders is to blame for difficulty in suing gun manufacturers, and, of course, that the NRA has blood on its hands.

Never mind that virtually everything he and his classmates said was false. Never mind that there’s no such thing as a full semi-automatic weapon. Never mind that the 2nd Amendment applies to far more than just handguns, or that almost every problem he listed is the result of bigger government, for which he now enthusiastically stumps.

Because he’s an expert, you see? He’s a survivor, so his moral legitimacy outweighs your capacity for reason. Forget what your fully developed prefrontal cortex is telling you, forget everything you’ve learned by actually studying the issues at hand, and listen to this wise, irreproachable child! Don’t worry about every stupid thing he’s said or done, and certainly disregard the virtue signaling.

Instead of criticizing, be grateful that you’ve lived to see these marvels of the universe, these angelic children who’ve come to save us from woe. Like a phoenix from the flame, they have risen out of the ashes of devastation to become the mainstream media’s most indispensable analysts. What would we do without them? How would we know which policies to implement and whom to accuse of murder by association?

After all, studying the issues is futile. Thank goodness for survivors — children so morally superior that they’ve become the undisputed experts on every problem facing America.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily






Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.