Another post-tragedy shot from hip

Opinion: February 10, 2011 at 12:00a.m.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Rep. Caroline McCarthy, D-N.Y., are proposing legislation that would reinstate a federal ban on the manufacture, import and sale of high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones Jared Loughner is accused of using in the horrific Tucson shootings that left six dead and 13 wounded, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz.

This latest manifestation of the “do-something syndrome” surprises nary one gun-rights supporter and explains why sales of high-capacity mags have jumped in recent weeks.

‘Assault weapons’ ban

Ammo mags containing more than 10 bullets were illegal under a federal “assault weapons” ban in place from 1994 to 2004. That didn’t mean folks couldn’t own or sell them. Companies could manufacture them only for purchase by law enforcement and government agencies.

But pre-ban magazines made before Sept. 13, 1994, were grandfathered in under the law and were available if a buyer was willing to pay $60 for what was a $16 piece of equipment.

The same folks who are buying the dickens out of them now were buying them in the 1990s when talk of that ban commenced. They aren’t criminals; they are sports enthusiasts and entrepreneurs. The preponderance of America’s gun owners are responsible, law-abiding people with no interest in committing crime.

The same question asked by supporters of the renewed ban was asked in 1994: Why does anyone need one of those? They should be left to the police and the military, not private citizens.

Disconnect

Therein lies the main disconnect with gun control advocates: They hold to the mistaken and potentially fatal belief that the police will be on hand to help them in their time of crisis.

I’m married to a retired police officer. My security detail lives in the same house. And he knows better than anyone that the only person who can give me a fighting chance to survive an attack is me.

In a self-defense situation, I don’t ever want to be in a fair fight. And I don’t have a clue how many rounds it might take to stop an attacker.

For gun-rights supporters, the issue isn’t what the magazines are for or how many rounds are necessary. The issue is what’s the next step if the government dictates how many are too many. Will Uncle Sam be back next year with a different number? And what’s so magical about 10?

The unthinkable tragedy in Tucson was the creation of a sick mind determined to carry out a sick idea. To presume that he would have been deterred once it became inconvenient assumes that the mind of a killer is capable of logic.

The question that gun-rights advocates want to respectfully pose to those adamant on restricting high-capacity magazine ownership is not “Why does anybody need one?” but “Why should responsible citizens not be allowed to own one?”

J.R. Labbe is the editorial director of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.