I am annoyed by the continuous series of letters from I-594 opponents, who either dishonestly or ignorantly misrepresent the content of the initiative. Some examples:
Sept. 26: “If father and son go out shooting, simply allowing the other to try out your firearm will make you and whom ever receives it a felon. That’s right folks, handing your son a rifle constitutes a ‘transfer.’ Self-defense classes and firearms training classes will also cause many to be felons.”
Sept. 28: “… this will make it difficult, if not impossible, for the Boy Scouts and other similar organizations to offer rifle and shotgun classes during summer camp. Sure, if a child’s parent is there and they have gone through a background check of their own they can ‘loan’ a firearm to their child. But most won’t have that opportunity.”
Both statements are entirely untrue. The initiative specifically allows transfer of a firearm “to a person who is under eighteen years of age for lawful hunting, sporting, or educational purposes while under the direct supervision and control of a responsible adult who is not prohibited from possessing firearms,” or to any person who may possess a gun “while hunting if the hunting is legal,” or “if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range.”
In other words, you may allow another to shoot your gun anywhere that shooting is legal. One letter writer gives a link that will allow the reader to get further information from an anti-I-594 website. I suggest instead that readers get their information directly from the initiative at http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/FinalText_483.pdf.
Mark Bothwell
Sultan
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.