You have a valid point, Chas.Charles L. Cotton wrote:
That is a legitimate philosophical point and I tend to lean that way myself because of my respect for the military. However, I struggle with prejudicing 300,000 Texans to give special treatment to 36. And we definitely are talking about extending special treatment to people between 18 and 20 years old. Unless they have licenses from other states, then there is the potential that 300,000 Texans will be unarmed and defenseless in at least three states, so roughly 36 people can have a Texas CHL between one and three years earlier. It's ironic that we grant special privileges to a class of people solely because they have volunteered for the job of protecting us, and in so doing increase the danger to the very people they have sworn to protect.
Chas.
Philosphically, the problem lies with the states that do not treat their young men and women in the armed forces with more respect and trust with firearms but allow them to drive.
Anygunanywhere