Why No Ohio Reciprocity?

[Liberty]

If the problem is the age issue, why didn't one of the people upstairs deciding these things get the idea we could have reciprocity as long as you are 21 are over, similar to the resident restriction on others?

I believe a few states have done this. This was my concern when the age limit for Texas CHLs was reduced to 18 for the military. For the DPS year 9/1/07 - 8/31/08, there were only 36 CHLs issued to people under age 21. However, 300,000 CHLs don't have reciprocity with at least Ohio and Washington, and possibly more if/when they take another look at Texas' CHL eligibility requirements. When considering changes to any law, it's critical to evaluate the potential consequences.

Chas.

It is also important to do the right thing. Not trusting the same young men with a CHL that we trust handle military grade weaponry was absurd. Its also cost us Nevada.

[seamusTX]

Not trusting the same young men with a CHL that we trust handle military grade weaponry was absurd.

I agree that it's absurd, but even the military does not seem to really trust soldiers with weapons unless the soldiers are in combat.

Aside from that, they generally don't allow military personnel to carry weapons or even have them on base in their quarters.

- Jim

[Purplehood]

Having been raised as an Air Force brat, and then spent time in both the USMC and USAR, I would have to agree. I have seen many Military personnel that only touched a weapon in Basic Training and occasionally for ceremonies or requalification.

[Charles L. Cotton]

If the problem is the age issue, why didn't one of the people upstairs deciding these things get the idea we could have reciprocity as long as you are 21 are over, similar to the resident restriction on others?

I believe a few states have done this. This was my concern when the age limit for Texas CHLs was reduced to 18 for the military. For the DPS year 9/1/07 - 8/31/08, there were only 36 CHLs issued to people under age 21. However, 300,000 CHLs don't have reciprocity with at least Ohio and Washington, and possibly more if/when they take another look at Texas' CHL eligibility requirements. When considering changes to any law, it's critical to evaluate the potential consequences.

Chas.

It is also important to do the right thing. Not trusting the same young men with a CHL that we trust handle military grade weaponry was absurd. Its also cost us Nevada.

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, 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.

[anygunanywhere]

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.

You have a valid point, 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

[seamusTX]

I have used the comparison between driving and carrying firearms, and I think it's educational.

However, it cuts two ways. Younger drivers are the worst drivers in terms of severe collisions, and some people want to raise the minimum age for unrestricted driving to 18. (Now that I am over 18, I am one of those people.)

I personally don't have a problem with allowing 18-year-olds who qualify for a CHL to carry, whether they are in the military or not; but most people will not see the issue that way.

- Jim

[Liberty]

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.

I am well aware I am in Nevada today and unarmed. Darned I need to get that Utah permit!!!

[Charles L. Cotton]

I am well aware I am in Nevada today and unarmed. Darned I need to get that Utah permit!!!

Come see me and I'll take care of that just for you!

Chas.

[Liberty]

I am well aware I am in Nevada today and unarmed. Darned I need to get that Utah permit!!!

Come see me and I'll take care of that just for you!

Chas.

I fully intend too at first opportunity after getting back into my house,

[TxDrifter]

It may depend on the job you had in the military as well. I was only a "Structural Specialist" in the Air Force and would have been one of those that goes for annual qualifications, but someone decided differently later. I ended up becoming what they call a Security Police Augmentee. We are chosen throughout our squadrons to supplement the SPs (Security Police, AF's version of MP) when they were short handed, or in my case for events on the base and when half the SP squadron went to Iraq during DS. All of that taught me a lot concerning my handgun and when to employ it. I was definitely more comfortable and confident carrying it at 19 than most likely were/are. I was very fortunate to never have had to draw it on someone as well. I think a lot of it is training period, whether it is your upbringing, or an experience such as that.

I should get my Utah permit as well though. I travel a lot for work and am debating on starting to take it with me to some states. Not sure if I want the hassle with the airlines though. Houston has been easy enough the couple of times I have taken it, but Cleveland was lost on how to do any of it.

[boomerang]

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, 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.

I agree. It also makes me less likely to renew my Texas CHL. Why shouldn't I get an out of state license instead that's honored where I travel? Many of them are less of a hassle and less expensive than the Texas CHL. Why spend the time and money for a renewal class, pay $70 to DPS for a renewal, submit half a dozen finger print cards, and wait months if I don't get any real benefit? That doesn't even count the risk of being arbitrarily disarmed.

[Liberty]

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, 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.

I agree. It also makes me less likely to renew my Texas CHL. Why shouldn't I get an out of state license instead that's honored where I travel? Many of them are less of a hassle and less expensive than the Texas CHL. Why spend the time and money for a renewal class, pay $70 to DPS for a renewal, submit half a dozen finger print cards, and wait months if I don't get any real benefit? That doesn't even count the risk of being arbitrarily disarmed.

The Texas CHL is still good for more places than any other option that we have. I also believe its important to support the movement.

[boomerang]

The Texas CHL is still good for more places than any other option that we have. I also believe its important to support the movement.

That may be the situation for you but it depends a lot on where someone travels. For me personally, if I have to get a license from another state because the Texas CHL doesn't cover me everywhere, and that other state's license does cover me everywhere I want to travel, it makes sense to "support the movement" that supports me by getting a license with the most relevant coverage.

[seamusTX]

That's fine, but keep your eye out for more states that do not recognize non-resident licenses from other states. I think Colorado is the only one that does that now.

- Jim

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

I have been looking to get Utah CHL so that I can carry in Ohio. My FIL lives there and I would really like to visit and carry since I am not familiar with the area. Problem is that I cant seem to find anyone who gives the class in my area...