First let me say that I think what happened at Marysville-Pilchuk High School is a tragedy. However there is nothing in Initiative 594 that would have prevented this from happening. Unlike other letter-writers, I have actually read the whole proposed initiative. Not just the benign pablum the Initiative backers put in the Voter Guide.

It’s true law-enforcement and military are exempt in their official capacity. So then if a deputy wants to buy a gun from a friend would this be in his “official capacity?” Not likely. If an Army sergeant wants to buy a private carry piece would he be exempt? Even less likely.

If the grandfather steps into the next shooting booth at a range would he still have “control and supervision” of his grandchild? It could and probably would be argued, no. This initiative isn’t about fairness, it’s about control, taxation and confiscation.

The voting pamphlet says “antiques are exempt.” Fair enough. Yet I-594 says virtually anything that takes a cartridge falls under this regulation. This will apply all the way back to firearms made in 1859. The federal guideline says, anything 1898 and before is exempt. How many times do you hear of someone being injured by a firearm made before 1898?

The irony here is the billionaire backers of I-594 have armed protection of their persons and property 24/7. They have no need to acquire a firearm.

So what’s the solution? Frankly I don’t know. I do know that “stop and frisk” laws work. At least that focuses on the people who should not have guns under any circumstance.

Denny Andrews, Bellevue