Snohomish’s pellet gun law is reasonable

I read with interest, the Dec. 24 letter to the editor from John Lorenz regarding the additional restrictions imposed on the discharge of Airsoft (pellet) guns in the City of Snohomish. Since I own a pellet gun which I use to encourage eaves-roosting pigeons to move along, I was somewhat alarmed at the legal jeopardy I might find myself in. After all, if, as in Mr. Lorenz’s words “the City of Snohomish has criminalized children playing with Airsoft toys,” what would these oppressive overlords do to an adult?

In summary, Ordinance 2407 was written in response to residents who had experienced their fellow citizens firing pellet guns at, or on to their property, putting the residents and their property at risk. Read the ordinance for yourselves. The ordinance does not criminalize owning or proper use of an air soft gun. Rather, it relies heavily on our residents’ common sense, astute information processing, and neighborly goodwill. Some of us were dealt a short hand of these virtues.

I leave you a final comment. On Dec. 29, the Seattle Times ran an article from the Detroit Free Press. The Justice Department would not be pursuing a case against Cleveland Police who, in 2014, had received a call about a “guy with a pistol.” The “guy” in question had spent the day outside the recreation center playing with a pellet gun. This was Tamir Rice; he was shot and killed. Tamir was 12 years old, playing with a “toy.” Airsoft gun? Not a toy.

Jan Lengenfelder

Snohomish