Gun account misfired

In The Spokesman-Review’s Jan. 14 headline story, the AP reporters state, “Magazine clips were limited to 10 rounds under the 1994 assault weapons ban.”

First, while both are ammunition feeding mechanisms, “magazines” and “clips” are quite different devices. Magazines are quick-changeable, spring-fed tubes. Clips are spring steel guides or channels, awkward to use and almost obsolete. Do S-R stories on vehicle theft talk about how many “motorcycle cars” are stolen annually?

Second, the vague claim that magazines were limited to 10 rounds under the 1994 “ban” is either unintentionally ignorant or willfully misleading. The law was political eyewash, prohibiting only the new manufacture of 10-round-plus magazines for civilian purchase. During the “ban,” you could still legally buy, sell, own, use or refurbish full-capacity, “pre-ban” magazines. They were neither banned nor outlawed; they did not magically disappear from use in 1994, only to reappear somehow in 2004.

The gun freedom vs. gun control debate is nearly 50 years old. Is it too much to ask that members of the news media invest a modicum of time and effort learning – and then reporting – actual, meaningful facts regarding this vital issue?

Frank Golubski

Spokane Valley