You've not misunderstood anything, with the quibble that "young children cannot carry weapons in public" unsupervised. A responsible adult is of course require

You've not misunderstood anything, with the quibble that "young children cannot carry weapons in public" unsupervised. A responsible adult is of course required in the situations where that makes sense (hunting and target shooting). One thing this BBC article clearly is confounding, based on the first anecdote, is the difference between being legally blind and what I'll call 100% blind. Hitting a half size target at 7 yards, equivalent to a real human at 14 yards or 13 meters, means he's not "100% blind". There are quite a few people who in the same test would have trouble keeping all their shots in the black. Now, assuming he doesn't have a near vision problem, and that the average distance between combatants in a gun fight is 7 and a half feet (2.3 meters), it's plausible he could be a responsible and safe concealed carrier. He at least convinced the skeptics who in due course issued him the license. Your points about being able to use a gun you're carrying are of course correct. If you're not willing to use it, you shouldn't own it, let alone carry it, guns are not magical talismans, no matter how much they're portrayed as being more than inanimate hunks of metal, plastic and/or wood.