The massacre of 20 children by a deranged killer with access to weapons of mass destruction has moved President Barack Obama to form a panel to recommend ways to combat gun violence.
A wide range of approaches will be considered, including, necessarily, possible restrictions on what types of weapons are available to the public.
That's a good place to start. Assault-style weapons (let's get this out of the way right now: rapid-fire, magazine-fed, automatic or semiautomatic weapons designed for military use) were banned in the U.S. from 1994 until 2004, when the legislation prohibiting them expired. They should be banned again. That would be a symbolic, although ultimately ineffective, step toward responsible gun ownership laws.
I'm bracing, though, for the sound and fury that will undoubtedly be unleashed by even this mild proposal. Americans have a long and impassioned relationship with their guns and the thought that what some people mistakenly consider their absolute right to own weapons of any kind may be tampered with drives them into a stuttering, stammering, spitting rage.
So hang on to your sanity. In any debate about gun ownership regulations, no argument seems to get past the first couple of sentences without degenerating into name-calling, insults and slander. We need to rise above that. Finding a solution to a deadly national problem — death by gun — requires a genuine and heartfelt commitment from everyone who wants to end this epidemic of preventable violence, and no possible solution or mitigating measure should be discounted without first being dispassionately examined.
Of course, there's not a chance in hell that will happen. In fact, I can barely keep from laughing out loud at the last sentence of the preceding paragraph. But, hey, I tried. The reality is that an attempt to take even the most basic and obvious step — keeping the general public from owning military-grade weapons — will bring out hordes of wild-eyed zealots who claim they need semiautomatic weapons that are easily converted to full automatic fire for "home protection" against God only knows what, and who also think that the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees them the right to bear arms up to and including tactical nuclear weapons.
That's why I'm pessimistic about chances for any kind of meaningful progress in this country's gun laws. For many gun advocates, discussing limits to ownership is unthinkable and they refuse to even consider the possibility of change. That leaves no room for debate, even as the death toll mounts. They are irrevocably wedded to gun ownership laws that have been proved to be dangerous to the common good.
The usual response from gun rights activists to a shooting rampage is to call for everyone to be allowed to carry concealed weapons, which would effectively create an army of trigger-happy vigilantes who have no training, supervision or accountability. Such forehead-smacking lunacy is stunning in its absurdity. It would make more sense to try to reason with the gun itself than with a person or group who would suggest this or the equally loony idea of arming teachers.
We'll soon be bombarded with outlandish proposals such as these — and much, much worse — as the gun lobby, led by the reactionary and anarchic National Rifle Association and aided and abetted by an increasingly extremist Republican Party, gears up to battle against even the most sensible attempts to bring sanity to America's gun-ownership laws.
Already, Wayne LaPierre, NRA executive vice president and Siena College graduate, has come out with rhetorical guns blazing. At his recent news conference in Washington, he refused any kind of accommodation with gun control advocates and instead shamefully attempted to shift the nation's focus from the main cause of gun violence — their easy availability — by blaming Hollywood, video games, the media and gun-free school zones, once again denying that guns kill people.
A full-scale assault on common sense and civic responsibility has been launched by the dangerously insecure, the chronically paranoid and the just plain crazy. The gun lobby's uncivil war against rational moderation is a fight a civilized society can't afford to lose.
Federman is a Times Union editor. His email is bfederman@timesunion.com