Twenty-one-year-old Missourians are allowed to buy a handgun. But they can’t carry it in public until they’re 23. Why and how and when did THAT happen? Don’t ask ozarksfirst.com. They’re too busy doing the journalistically farcical vox populi deal—a heinously manipulative media technique that’s normally the purview of bubble-headed bleached blonds on local TV news. Oh wait; it’s a transcript, and Ms. Williams isn’t blond (as of writing). So . . . “We asked people their opinions about this gun legislation,” Jessica Williams reveals, cleverly hiding her degree in Statistical Analysis. “And got a lot of different answers. ‘I grew up with guns, I think everyone should know how to use it,’ said Greg Pettus. ‘I don’t like it, I think it should be as high as possible. It just makes me really uncomfortable that people of a younger age could carry guns and not know about it,’ said Samantha Alcozer.” What about older people?
My Mom’s 86; I gotta say she’s passed the gun-carrying-is-OK-at-your-age curve. In fact, Sam’s got the right idea for a test: “Do you know you’re carrying a gun?” Anyway, we get the why of the matter. “
The [unnamed] sponsor of this bill says he introduced it because there are a lot of young soldiers coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan who can carry a gun while they’re fighting, but can’t get a conceal and carry permit at home.
Sure, PTSD-sufferers shoudl be able to protect themselves against PTSD sufferers, too. I jest. Again. Still. The examiner.com is more illuminating.
The bill in question is Missouri HB 1692, and actually started out as a measure dealing with regulating real estate brokers. It has since been extensivley amended to include not only the minimum age requirement change for concealed carry, but a couple other firearms law reforms (and also some additional provisions that have nothing to do with firearms–this has become quite an . . . ecelectic [sic] bill).
We’re going to rock down to . . . ecelectic avenue. OK, I’m done.