‘Responsible’ gun owners don’t shoot at shoplifters

Those who oppose even the smallest movement towards better gun safety policies do so love to invoke the figure of the “responsible gun owner.”

“Law-abiding gun owners will not accept blame for acts of criminals,” National Rifle Association head Wayne LaPierre said in his 2013 remarks to Congress. “Teaching safe and responsible gun ownership works.”

It all sounds good on paper, but Detroit saw what that mentality actually looks like in practice last week, when a woman who was certified for concealed carry— meaning she had to take gunsafety classes and everything— decided that the best way to deal with a shoplifting that had nothing whatsoever to do with her was to pull out her gun and open fire in a Home Depot parking lot.

This is what you get from the simplistic dividing of people into “law-abiding” and “criminal,” as well as assuring people that taking a few classes makes you a responsible gun owner: A woman so sure of her righteousness and responsibility that it didn’t even occur to her not to do something so immoral and stupid.

Immoral because under no circumstances should the penalty for shoplifting be death at the hands of a vigilante. Stupid because she was in a parking lot, where innocent people are milling around.

What’s even more troubling is that the woman remains unarrested and uncharged and may not face criminal charges at all. Under Michigan law, it may not be possible to charge her with a crime because, foolishly, the state allows people to take potshots at people who are fleeing from the commission of a felony.

Let’s hope she doesn’t get away scot-free. If responsible gun ownership is really the ideal that our country is trying to uphold, then, by God, let’s start by throwing the book at people who are irresponsible with their guns.

Unfortunately, despite their claims to be for responsible gun ownership, gun lobbyists like the NRA have worked diligently at chipping away any legal recourse that victims of gun violence or the government has to hold people responsible for mishandling guns.

It’s not just the sheer number of guns this country has, but the increasingly cavalier and irresponsible attitudes growing up around it, where guns are treated like toys or props in Dirty Harry fantasies instead of like the deadly weapons that they, in fact, are. The result is behavior like this woman’s, where the excitement of finally getting to use your cool toy outweighs the fear of killing someone.

It all starts with the marketing around guns. Marketers often advertise guns by stoking the belief that confronting criminals is a common part of everyday life, framing guns as ideal playthings for children or promoting them as accessories to the “manly” life, as if they were cigars and sports cars. In other words, despite LaPierre’s posturing about responsible gun ownership, marketers encourage irresponsible gun ownership.

But despite all this irresponsibility, gun manufacturers enjoy broad immunity against lawsuits. It’s hard to imagine that conservatives really support responsible gun ownership while simultaneously encouraging irresponsibility in the sales and marketing of guns, by refusing to hold gun companies accountable.

If guns are status symbols and trophies, people aren’t going to lock them up or use them responsibly. They are going to want to have them out for others to see. If you drop so much money on your vigilante fantasies, you’re going to want to justify that expense by having a confrontation with a criminal.

A couple of concealed-carry classes isn’t going to counteract that, especially if the classes are being taught by people who are also entranced by a culture that romanticizes guns.