In Danny Westneat’s column “Checking gun sales a tough sell” [Local News, Oct. 7], a couple legally sells two assault-style rifles to a person they felt had a questionable background on two separate occasions. The wife then states “…we didn’t do anything wrong.”
In a legal sense, I suppose not. But what about ethically? I find it unfathomable as to why someone would sell a deadly weapon (be it a rifle, handgun or anything else) to a person whom they had concerns about. I was further shocked to learn that after their sale to a convicted felon, they still don’t support background checks due to the inconvenience. It is this seemingly lack of personal responsibility for the results of one’s actions that drives legislation such as Initiative 594.
In a perfect world, government regulation of many activities would not be needed. But as this story illustrates, humans are far from perfect. I will be voting for I-594, not because it would be an end-all solution, but because it would reinforce our moral obligation to do the right thing.
Karl Kohlstaedt, Olympia