TexasCHLforum.com

Just posted on handgunlaw.us; TX CHL no longer valid in MN. Change made 8/12. Other states removed from MN list include MO, UT and WY. TX removed because it issues to 18 yr old military.

I wish they had just limited reciprocity to people age 21 and over as did several other states. If you look at Ryan's reciprocity map, you'll see several states marked with "21" meaning they recognize our CHL issued to people who are 21 or older. We almost lost reciprocity with those states when Texas foolishly dropped the minimum age to 18. The only reason it didn't happen was because of the work of NRA lobbyists in those states.

Let's look at the numbers to see how many additional Texans were able to get a CHL as a result of the dropping of the minimum age. Below are listed the number of new CHLs issued to people age 18 to 20. I only listed the last three years because every 18 year old would be 21 in three years and would be eligible under the "old" law. Actually, these numbers are overstated because the new CHLs age 19 or 20 would have been eligible in only one or two more years.

2014 - 237
2013 - 185
2012 - 123
Total - 545 CHLs added over a three year period who were under age 21.

This is a great example of passing legislation that seems patriotic without factoring in the true impact on all Texans, including hundreds of thousands of veterans who are over 21 and hold a CHL. So the bottom line currently is 850,000+ Texas CHLs cannot carry self-defense handguns in MN so 545 people under age 21 can have a license.

Now that one state had deviated from the policy of recognizing Texas CHLs issued only to people age 21 and over, other states may follow MN's lead. This is especially true with states that only recently passed concealed-carry.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I wish they had just limited reciprocity to people age 21 and over as did several other states. If you look at Ryan's reciprocity map, you'll see several states marked with "21" meaning they recognize our CHL issued to people who are 21 or older. We almost lost reciprocity with those states when Texas foolishly dropped the minimum age to 18. The only reason it didn't happen was because of the work of NRA lobbyists in those states.

Let's look at the numbers to see how many additional Texans were able to get a CHL as a result of the dropping of the minimum age. Below are listed the number of new CHLs issued to people age 18 to 20. I only listed the last three years because every 18 year old would be 21 in three years and would be eligible under the "old" law. Actually, these numbers are overstated because the new CHLs age 19 or 20 would have been eligible in only one or two more years.

2014 - 237
2013 - 185
2012 - 123
Total - 545 CHLs added over a three year period who were under age 21.

This is a great example of passing legislation that seems patriotic without factoring in the true impact on all Texans, including hundreds of thousands of veterans who are over 21 and hold a CHL. So the bottom line currently is 850,000+ Texas CHLs cannot carry self-defense handguns in MN so 545 people under age 21 can have a license.

Chas.

Awesome breakdown of benefit/drawback on this. I suspected it was something like that, but the number I had in my head was a lot higher for 18-21 military.

I thought I saw a post from someone asking about the bill lowering the CHL age for military members to 18, but I don't see the post now. Anyway, it was HB322 (79R) 2005 session. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/billlookup ... Bill=HB322" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It amended Govt Code 411.172 (g) and (h).

Mina-SOH-tah is one of the most liberal states in the union.

Another one to avoid visiting/spending money there...

I think I am going to get NV license soon to cover MN. Right now I have TX, AZ, CT, NH,.. have had FL, PA, & ME and thinking of getting them back.

Texas lowered the age for military members in 2005, 10 years ago. I'm curious why MN is using that reason now for dropping Texas?

K5GU wrote:Texas lowered the age for military members in 2005, 10 years ago. I'm curious why MN is using that reason now for dropping Texas?

My understanding from handgunlaw and another post from ammoland implies that MN changed their reciprocity criteria from "substancially similar" to just "similar", but then again, who knows. Remember all the previous years MN honored TX, TX never honored MN.

Abraham wrote:Mina-SOH-tah is one of the most liberal states in the union.

Another one to avoid visiting/spending money there...

Minnesota, isn't that where that former wrestling phony is now the former governor?

Oldgringo wrote:

Abraham wrote:Mina-SOH-tah is one of the most liberal states in the union.

Another one to avoid visiting/spending money there...

Minnesota, isn't that where that former wrestling phony is now the former governor?

Didn't that x governor just say he would like to run as Christie's Vice President?

Since this is called reciprocity, does that mean Texas will no longer honor Minnesota's? If not that's how it should be.

guess no more fishing in mn. TX needs to drop mn right now. K5GU, probably cause it is easier to use the age thing than to say they don't like the military or veterans.

guess no more fishing in mn. TX needs to drop mn right now. K5GU, probably cause it is easier to use the age thing than to say they don't like the military or veterans.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I wish they had just limited reciprocity to people age 21 and over as did several other states. If you look at Ryan's reciprocity map, you'll see several states marked with "21" meaning they recognize our CHL issued to people who are 21 or older. We almost lost reciprocity with those states when Texas foolishly dropped the minimum age to 18. The only reason it didn't happen was because of the work of NRA lobbyists in those states.

That's a very reasonable solution.... As you stated, too bad cooler heads didn't prevail.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I wish they had just limited reciprocity to people age 21 and over as did several other states. If you look at Ryan's reciprocity map, you'll see several states marked with "21" meaning they recognize our CHL issued to people who are 21 or older. We almost lost reciprocity with those states when Texas foolishly dropped the minimum age to 18. The only reason it didn't happen was because of the work of NRA lobbyists in those states.

Let's look at the numbers to see how many additional Texans were able to get a CHL as a result of the dropping of the minimum age. Below are listed the number of new CHLs issued to people age 18 to 20. I only listed the last three years because every 18 year old would be 21 in three years and would be eligible under the "old" law. Actually, these numbers are overstated because the new CHLs age 19 or 20 would have been eligible in only one or two more years.

2014 - 237
2013 - 185
2012 - 123
Total - 545 CHLs added over a three year period who were under age 21.

This is a great example of passing legislation that seems patriotic without factoring in the true impact on all Texans, including hundreds of thousands of veterans who are over 21 and hold a CHL. So the bottom line currently is 850,000+ Texas CHLs cannot carry self-defense handguns in MN so 545 people under age 21 can have a license.

Now that one state had deviated from the policy of recognizing Texas CHLs issued only to people age 21 and over, other states may follow MN's lead. This is especially true with states that only recently passed concealed-carry.

Chas.

It seems that the problem these other states have with Texas CHLs is that there's no difference in licenses between a license possessed by those 21 and over, and a license possessed by those under 21 years old. What do you think about changing the Texas CHL so that there's two types of permits, one for those 21 or over, and a different one for those under 21? The two types of licenses could be equivalent under Texas law with where the licensees could carry, the requirements to get a license, etc. The sole difference would be an age requirement where the licenses for younger licensees would have a big "UNDER 21" warning printed on it, and maybe have the license printed in portrait mode like under-21 driver's licenses instead of landscape mode like over-21 driver's licenses.

Some other states have differently-tiered licenses. For example, South Dakota has a "normal" permit, and also an "enhanced" permit which requires a training class. The training class means that some states recognize an enhanced South Dakota permit but not an normal South Dakota permit, so I think having two legally distinct types of Texas CHLs would allow them to recognize one license and not the other, where being under 21 matters under the other state's reciprocity laws.

I really want to find a way to increase our reciprocity for those over 21 without removing the ability for those under 21 to carry inside Texas and in states where age does not matter for reciprocity, no matter how few of those under 21 licensees there may actually be.