Response to editorial on I-594 | Letter
Published 4:46 pm Friday, October 31, 2014
This is in response to Ms. Jaecks letter and the “Rights and Rules” Opinion piece by editor Mary L. Grady in the Wednesday, October 22, 2014 edition of the Mercer Island Reporter.
I-594 has been promoted as a means to “close the gun show loophole” by requiring a background check of anyone purchasing a firearm. Yet, much of the proposed initiative refers to a, “transfer” rather than a “sale or purchase”. “Transfer, means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans” Section (2) (25), I-594.
As someone who has experience owning and handling guns I am often asked to share that experience with others. Also, my personal practical experience and knowledge is enhanced through the exchange and sharing of my personal firearms with other responsible adults of my own choosing.
I-594 would only allow for either of these above scenarios IF
(f) The temporary transfer of a firearm…….. (ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located;”
In other words, if I choose to share MY personal property with another I may only do so if it is done at an established shooting range AND store the firearms there at all times? Ms. Jaecks, is this what you had in mind when you wrote, “3. It does NOT prohibit someone from handing a firearm to another person”?
Under I-594, I am NOT free to responsibly exercise dominion and control over my personal property without government control and oversight? Was this really what was intended for this initiative?
Finally, I know that many of my neighbors are passionate about this topic. While I disagree with many of the inherent concepts, I respect their rights to engage in spirited discourse. The rude and dismissive tone in the “Rights and rules” opinion has no place in a considered and respectful exchange of ideas.
It is hard to get, “too concerned about the possible trampling of rights regarding gun ownership”.
“Will it be a hassle to get a gun or let your brother-in-law borrow it? Yeah – well so. Tough.”
To the author of that opinion.
“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it”. – Voltaire
Please don’t so casually dismiss my rights.
