TexasCHLforum.com

I was looking at Washington state and why they say they don't accept Texas. What I saw on the site was:

"Texas No Allows under 21-yrs-old honorably discharged veterans to have license."

I did a quick look and didn't see this exception in Texas for under 21 yrs old. Did i just missu it? If this is not a legitimate excemption in Texas, it seems we should qualify for reciprocity in WA. We meet all the other listed requirements.


http://www.atg.wa.gov/ConcealedWeapons/Reciprocity.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Most of the states that don't honor Texas CHL do so because we allow 18-20 year old active military to qualify. It's stupid. But their playground, their rules.

GC §411.172. ELIGIBILITY. (a) A person is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
.......
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.

When Rep. Hupp sponsored the bill that allowed people from 18 to 20 years of age, she was warned that it was likely to cause Texas to loose reciprocity with a number of states. The warning was ignored and the NRA worked hard to keep this from happening. If you look at the reciprocity map Ryan keeps up for us, you'll see a number of states that honor a Texas CHL only if the person is 21 or older. Had it not been for the NRA's work, we would have lost reciprocity with a number of states and others would not have enter into an agreement in the first place.

I don't have any information about Washington.

Chas.

jerry_r60 wrote:http://www.atg.wa.gov/ConcealedWeapons/Reciprocity.aspx

That's the WA Attorney General's website so it looks official to me.

Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14792" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is so the entire West coast is off limits to us.

Wow another privileged class in Texas when it comes to gun laws - Where is the uproar?

texanjoker wrote:Wow another privileged class in Texas when it comes to gun laws - Where is the uproar?

Oh, there was an uproar alright, but when it comes to passing legislation that appears to benefit law enforcement or the military, logic, rational thought, and consideration for the consequences goes out the window.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

texanjoker wrote:Wow another privileged class in Texas when it comes to gun laws - Where is the uproar?

Oh, there was an uproar alright, but when it comes to passing legislation that appears to benefit law enforcement or the military, logic, rational thought, and consideration for the consequences goes out the window.

Chas.

I just had to call that out since the LEO class is the one always banged on and when I saw that, it actually effects CHL holders in a negative way.

Keith B wrote:GC §411.172. ELIGIBILITY. (a) A person is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
.......
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (a)(2), a person who is at least 18 years of age but not yet 21 years of age is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person:
(1) is a member or veteran of the United States armed forces, including a member or veteran of the reserves or national guard;
(2) was discharged under honorable conditions, if discharged from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard; and
(3) meets the other eligibility requirements of Subsection (a) except for the minimum age required by federal law to purchase a handgun.

Thanks, i did a quick look, yesterday and missed what you are quoting above. That's what prompted me to ask the question. You showed me what i was looking for. It's too bad WA doesn't just allow those with CHL and are over 21 to have reciprocity as Charles mentioned other states have done.

apostate wrote:Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14792" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry for the double post. There were 20 something pages in "other states" I scanned for awhile and didn't see one on WA so posted. Looks like i didn't look far enough.

jerry_r60 wrote:

apostate wrote:Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14792" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry for the double post. There were 20 something pages in "other states" I scanned for awhile and didn't see one on WA so posted. Looks like i didn't look far enough.

Now I'm sorry. My intent wasn't to criticize you not finding a five year old discussion but instead to share my similar experience... without a lot of typing.

The TX DPS has some demographic pages up about CHL approvals. It works out that 99.98% of us are being penalized for 0.02% of us. The other states should just state that they will not recognize TX CHLsunless the person is at least 21.

txnative1951 wrote:The TX DPS has some demographic pages up about CHL approvals. It works out that 99.98% of us are being penalized for 0.02% of us. The other states should just state that they will not recognize TX CHLsunless the person is at least 21.

Why should they do that? They have their rules and it looks like they're happy with them. If the voters and taxpayers in Washington State aren't demanding a change to the reciprocity law there, their legislators have more important things to do.