Editorials / Opinion

Seattle Times letters to the editor

Passing legislation requires more optimism

In the Washington state House Chamber, Gov. Jay inslee, left, speaks to reporters about legislation that would regulate firearms in Olympia, Wash., March 11. He is joined by Rep. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, right. The next day, House Democrats conceded defeat in passing a bill requiring background checks for gun purchases. (AP PHOTO/THE OLYMPIAN/STEVE BLOOM)

Since I cannot come up with a polite word for how I really feel, I will just say I am quite frustrated [“Bill to boost gun checks falls short in state House,” page one, March 13].To the Democrats who “conceded defeat,” if you step into a problem believing that to win “is a stretch goal for us,” then you are bound to not succeed.

You cannot expect to accomplish something if, as Rep. Jamie Pedersen says, “it turns out it was too much of a stretch.”

To the mostly Republicans who vote against background checks, what is the reason exactly? Most people want gun background checks for all, so what is the holdup?

Please do not tell me that the National Rifle Association is more important to you than the citizens of our state.

To the voters: Why do you vote for such people?

–Zenkosi Zulu, Seattle

Gun owner identification proposal

I proposed to the Legislature that once a person has passed a background check it would be embossed on to your driver’s license as “cleared for firearms,” which could be presented at the time of a sale. If one were convicted of any felonies, the license is surrendered and the clearance removed. No gun registration.

It would work. That’s probably why they never got back to me because they truly want to ban guns eventually.

–Howard Stoppelman, Kirkland