It is supposed to be a dark view which one might call satire. There are differing opinions, obviously, on which is more effective: 1) to carry a gun - which can potentially lead to more violence; or 2) to not carry a gun and then not have the opportunity to confront another person who might start shooting a gun. "Statistics" of varying reliability can be obtained to speak for either option. However, regarding your point about age. Scroll down your link to page 2, item 11. (although there is no item 2-10) It seems in Idaho, peoples ages 18-21 can also get a licence "subject to limitations which the authorities deem appropriate."
The trouble is that this is a question of "should I carry a gun?" being answered with "no one should carry a gun." Some individuals believe that, with proper training, they are better off with one. Some don't. Most would not be swayed on this front by the arguments of the author. And I am not qualified to answer on the latter exemption... it could be an exemption for family friends of the sheriff or individuals under regular threat of violence.There are differing opinions, obviously, on which is more effective: 1) to carry a gun - which can potentially lead to more violence; or 2) to not carry a gun and then not have the opportunity to confront another person who might start shooting a gun.
thx for your answer. It would be nice if no one carried guns. I wish there were large gun-free zones and that all schools were gun-free. It's easy to wish - much harder to develop policy and effectively enforce it. As for the exemptions, unless one of us were an 18-year-old in Idaho trying to get a gun permit, it would be hard to know whether anyone who applies gets the exemption, or only, as you say, someone under threat of violence.