More repercussions

I’m glad to see that U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan is cracking down on gun offenders [“Feds: Gun offenders can expect more time in prison,” page one, June 19].

She says that “we will prosecute those who are the problem.” I know she is speaking within the scope of her authority, but she’s not going to be able to actually do it. The problem is the National Rifle Association and all the state and federal lawmakers who do their bidding.

I’m very tired of hearing that we have enough gun laws and just need to enforce the ones we have.

Here’s a few sensible suggestions for some more: Make it a felony to allow your gun to fall into the hands of a child.

You should go to prison, you should lose custody of your child and you should never be allowed to own a gun again.

Make it a felony to allow your gun to fall into the hands of a criminal.

If you own it, it’s your responsibility. Require thorough background checks, psychological assessments and intensive gun handling and safety training before handing out weapons permits, especially permits for concealed weapons.

Washington state’s “must issue” concept is insane, just like Ian Stawicki, who was issued a concealed-carry permit simply because he had not yet committed a crime, even though everyone who knew him — including the police — knew he was violently unbalanced.

Is it possible to sue our legislators for failing to provide for the safety of the citizenry? My right to live in a safe society is being trampled by people who can’t parse the Second Amendment and who spend anything it takes to influence our lawmaking.

As for protecting the home: All the research shows that a gun in the home is four times more likely to be used on a friend or family member than on a criminal invading the home. This means that, for gun owners, every dead criminal is worth four dead family members.

Are you gun owners really willing to accept those odds? How do your friends and family feel about that?

— John Peekstok, Shoreline