Why No Ohio Reciprocity?

[seamusTX]

Have you looked at the list of Utah instructors on the State of Utah web site? I don't know the URL, but I have seen it. There are quite a few outside Utah. I would be surprised if there weren't one near San Antonio.

Have you posted a separate inquiry in the "Class Schedules & Locations" section? There may be an instructor out there who lurks.

- Jim

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

I looked at the Utah website and only found a guy in Austin but his classes are during the week. I will try option B, thanks!

[NcongruNt]

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

IMHO, yes and no. I personally did not get a driver's license until a week before I turned 18. While there are the significant factors of maturity with younger teenagers, a large portion (if not most) youngins these days don't really mature to prudent responsibility until their mid-20s. I had two major accidents in my first car within a year of getting my license, while I was 18. While the root cause of those accidents was my inexperience (following too closely in one, not paying sufficient attention in the other), I think this same issue plays an important factor with younger drivers. I've seen too many early-20s people driving recklessly to think that raising the age to 18 will be worth the social expense of denying young drivers the right to travel as they wish. It would make working a part-time job (necessary to the survival of a family in some cases, as well as helping teens become more responsible financially and with the management of their time in others) in most places impossible. Houston is a prime example of a city in which you cannot reasonably travel without driving a car.

A proper solution would be to raise children to act responsibly so that they conduct themselves properly when not supervised, whether it is driving or during any other aspect of their lives. But you can't legislate that. Parents who do not believe the children to be adequately responsible can simply (*gasp!*) deny them the ability to obtain a driver's license or car. At least that's how it should be done, in my idyllic mind.

At a mere pedestrian glance, this same reasoning for me carries over to firearms. The difference is that the status quo with concealed handguns is to restrict younger adults from the right to carry. I don't have an answer for this predicament, other than my previously given opinions. It is a reasonable assessment to conclude that a young adult serving in the military is likely to act in a responsible manner, as military training and service effectively acts as a fast-track in developing areas of personal responsibility and prudent behavior. There are of course exceptions, and by making this policy we exclude many other groups of people who are responsible. Unfortunately there is no official way of determining the maturity of any given person except for age (which, unfortunately, seems to be increasingly less of an indicator of maturity these days).

Unfortunately, we've opened Pandora's Box in regards to reciprocity related to the issue of the age of our CHL holders. The only way to internally remedy that now would be to no longer issue CHLs for those under 21 and ride it out for 3 years, when we would again be eligible for reciprocity with those states who deny us due to age restrictions. The only other way to solve the problem would be to convince those states to adapt their standards to allow our underage CHLers to carry (very unlikely) or add stipulations to a reciprocity agreement that they would not recognize a CHL carried by someone under 21. Either one would require petition from constituents who have no vested interest in the changes or an extended dialogue between public servants of both states to come to an agreement.

[seamusTX]

I don't want to contribute to thread drift by discussing driving further.

You are correct that Texas residents have little to no chance of influencing the legislatures or executive officials of other states. Texas has gone as far as I think it reasonable can with vigorous negotiation of reciprocity and granting unilateral reciprocity to residents of other states.

I would prefer that the RKBA of all young adults be acknowledged. However, as long as CHL remains a political issue, we probably will not be able to do that.

Perhaps a solution is to issue a special class of license to which reciprocity does not apply. Call it a "Texas in-state-only license" or something like that.

- Jim

[The Annoyed Man]

I just went for my Utah CFP last Saturday, so now I have reciprocity with Ohio.

[Dutchster]

Two things about Ohio - first, effective 4/7/2009, persons with military experience will no longer be prohibited from purchasing a handgun in Ohio. Believe me, this caused a lot of debate about creating 'special classes' of citizens, regardless it passed and was signed into law. The minimum age for a CHL remains unchanged at 21.

Second, my understanding of why we do not have reciprocity actually has to do with Texas's requirement that for reciprocity or recognition the other state (i.e. Ohio) must specifically ascertain whether a person is prohibited from possessing a firearm under Federal law. While thorough and comprehensive, Ohio's background check does not do this. The only time an FBI check is run on an applicant is if they have lived in Ohio for less than five years. Otherwise the check is run through the state's computers.