EDITORIAL: Let’s re-examine federal gun, ammunition laws

   It has been some time since there was an act of violence that has so consumed our national consciousness.
   The senseless and despicable shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, just after midnight last Friday morning is the latest in a string of such crimes. Aurora joins the names of Fort Hood, Virginia Tech and Columbine.
   The theater was full for the midnight showing of the latest Batman film when James Eagan Holmes, a 24-year-old dressed in body armor, allegedly opened fire with an assault-style rifle, a shotgun and a handgun, killing 12 people and wounding 58 more, some of whom remain in critical condition.
   Of those who will survive, some will suffer the results of those wounds for the rest of their lives.
   Details and reports of what happened have been coming out steadily as the nation seemingly sucks the information up like a sponge.
   Who the shooter was seems to have been answered. Mr. Holmes was arrested outside the theater and appeared in court Monday morning, his hair dyed bright red.
   How he legally bought the weapons and ammunition has been determined, according to police.
   But the two big questions — why did he do it and what do we do to make it harder for further such heinous crimes to occur — are still to be answered.
   Regardless of the outcome of the “why he did it” question, he and others who have committed mass killings are not of sound mind. Brilliant, perhaps, but insane nonetheless and there is little we can do to change that.
   What we can do, and should do, is re-examine federal gun and ammunition laws.
   We need to find a way to protect the Second Amendment in a way that allows Americans to legally own guns, but protects Americans from crazed individuals and groups.
   In debates over the weekend, some have said assault rifles should be banned, a position held by the New York mayor who also wants to ban large soft drinks. Others think we should not allow the purchase of large amounts of ammunition over the Internet.
   Some think we should prohibit the purchase of drum clips that hold up to 100 rounds of ammunition. Such clips are available for weapons ranging from handguns to assault rifles.
   On the opposite end of the spectrum, some people believe the laws for carrying concealed or non-concealed weapons should be relaxed, citing examples of instances where citizens with weapons prevented or curtailed other such mass killing attempts. The theory is that if the Colorado shooter thought there was a possibility of audience members blasting back at him he might have had second thoughts about his plan.
   Indeed, many are passionate about the topic of gun control. Legal gun ownership is a way of life in many parts of this country. And the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and law-abiding, but Congress and the country need to start a dialogue geared toward making all of us, including the many non-gun owners, more secure.
   When the subject of gun control comes up, as it has off and on again for years, we think of the speech, made by President Andrew Shepherd (actor Michael Douglas) in the 1995 film, “The American President.”
   Speaking at a White House press conference, the president addresses the topic of his ill-conceived crime bill. He says: “As of today, it no longer exists. I’m throwing it out. I’m throwing it out and writing a law that makes sense. You cannot address crime prevention without getting rid of assault weapons and handguns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I’m gonna convince Americans that I’m right, and I’m gonna get the guns.”
   That’s one way to address the problem. Doubtless there are others, including more aggressive enforcement of laws already on the books. Last Friday’s tragedy has made us aware again of the need to find a way that works.