Editor’s note: This letter is in response to two letters (“Want to shoot an assault rifle? Join the army” and “Responsible gun ownership should come with some scrutiny”) published Oct. 2, 2019.

There aren’t a lot of people wandering the trails with automatic rifles, but there are plenty of dangerous animals and opportunists. A man needs no weapon at all to victimize a woman.

Last year I followed the stories of two different missing women, one a runner and one a hiker — two recreations that I engage in avidly — and to my great dismay, the outcome for both women was poor. One was found murdered by a man she didn’t know while she was out running, and the other, gone without a trace. The hiker was familiar with the day hike she embarked on, so the likelihood that she lost her way is slim. In all probability, she ran into someone or something that wanted to hurt her. Bear spray offers approximately 6 seconds of spray time, which is dismally inadequate if you are miles from nowhere, particularly against a two-legged predator.

For too long women have been told to use the buddy system, or that one thing or another just isn’t safe for them to do. I don’t accept that and neither do many other women I know who carry.

Democrats like Hillary Clinton are not shy about their desire to get rid of legal gun ownership. And gun owners are correct to be wary of the slow erosion of their gun rights by seemingly common sense gun laws like ERPOs (Extreme Risk Protection Orders, or red flag laws) which carry too much ambiguity, allowing an individual’s gun rights to be temporarily or otherwise terminated by an allegation and/or an anti-gun judge. A history of violent crime or documented mental disorder is sensible, but unfortunately, the gun laws aren’t being written with such precision. They are intentionally and increasingly porous.

Brandy Garton

Enumclaw