Editor,
Most responsible gun owners cringe when politicians start talking about gun laws, and it is to be expected when the best they can come up with is to place greater restrictions on the piece of equipment while failing to accept that it is people who commit the violence.
Background checks are a great example of a good idea gone bad. It would be fantastic if getting a background check on an individual were as easy as it should be.
It would be nice if parents looking for child care providers, persons looking for in-home senior care and assistance, store owners and business owners looking for trustworthy employees, were able to get the comprehensive information needed to ensure the safety of loved ones and the security of business and funds.
Think of the number of crimes that could be prevented and the suffering that would be avoided.
This is the same background information that applies to individuals desiring to purchase a firearm and that information is not available to the average citizen in a timely, convenient, nor inexpensive way.
A good example is a citizen wishing to transfer ownership of a firearm in Washington state, who will be subjected to a $25 to $50 fee per firearm when transferring it via a licensed dealer.
Background checks are a sticking point for many gun advocates since it appears that the background check is secondary to gathering a data base on guns and gun owners. If the true desire is to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them due to such things as criminal history and mental and addiction issues, then the background check has to be the focus and making it readily available is imperative.
It seems to me that the individual who wishes to purchase a firearm or obtain any of the employment opportunities I mentioned is the one with the burden to demonstrate a level of responsibility to have them and it is the responsibility of our government to provide that information when requested.
Points of contact for obtaining the information are already in place in the form of Department of Licensing offices, police departments and sheriff’s offices. As any request of action by a government agency will result in an expense, a modest charge of $5 per request would be reasonable and the information obtained should satisfy authorization for a legal transfer of a firearm or employment in any of the high risk areas mentioned.
This process should not be difficult or time-consuming for law-abiding, taxpaying citizens who pay substantial taxes every year for the very systems this request would burden.
In the long run a policy such as this would prevent many of the crimes these same agencies now spend time on. Stop making laws that punish those of us who already abide by the law and further restricting our rights
For those that would argue that this is not possible or may be a burden on the system, I would like to point out that technology has improved, yet implementing it has not. We need better connectivity to local, state and federal data bases at the local law enforcement level.
A digital scanner on the counter of the offices I mentioned earlier could capture anyone’s fingerprints quickly and efficiently for comparison in the data base, those prints along with a valid photo ID should result in a comprehensive background check of that individual in a very reasonable amount of time.
Am I the only law-abiding gun owner who thinks the majority of gun laws have nothing to do with preventing crime and everything to do with political gain?
Robert Clark
Oak Harbor
