
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, February 10, 1995                   TAG: 9502100084
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-10   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

NO SIX-PACKS, BUT SIX-SHOOTERS? SURE

IN ITS LATEST public-spirited contribution to community betterment, Virginia's gun lobby this week saved Roanoke from becoming an ``island of jeopardy'' for law-abiding gun-owners who might pay a visit to the Star City of the South.

Grateful the city should be, too, for the General Assembly's willingness to heed the gun lobby's counsel and refuse Roanoke the authority to pass a local ordinance outlawing handguns in city parks. And grateful for a right-thinking governor: If the required city-charter change had somehow made it through the assembly, George Allen was standing tall, ready himself to shoot it down with a veto.

Why, tourists would stay away by the droves if they thought there'd be no opportunity to visit a city park for a little gunplay. After all, Roanoke's parks have some of the fattest, laziest squirrels and pigeons in the world - ideal targets for those who'll travel from far and wide to hone their marksmanship here in our city parks.

This has always been one of Roanoke's major attractions, firing off a clip or two at park pigeons, and here the city was about to spoil it.

Thank goodness, the National Rifle Association and the Virginia Firearms Dealers Association prevented this folly, aiming their mighty howitzers of political influence at the legislature to kill a charter change City Council needed to enact the ban.

Recognition must also go to Dels. Vic Thomas of Roanoke and Morgan Griffith of Salem for voting against the charter bill, sponsored by their misguided colleague, Del. Clifton ``Chip'' Woodrum of Roanoke, at council's request.

It is good that Thomas and Griffith saw how shortsighted it was for the city to want to protect children and frisbee players (no golfing) and picnickers (no alcoholic beverages) from getting shot in the parks. Like, really: Nobody has gotten killed yet. What's the problem with gun violence in the parks now and again, so long as people are just scared or wounded?

Can city officials not get their priorities straight? What's the risk for a few kids, compared with the risk for visitors who won't go anywhere without their pieces? As those looking after the city's interests suggest, all it would take is for a couple of law-abiding visitors to get stopped by police for driving through a park with a gun in a car, and there goes Roanoke's best, er, shot at tourism development.

And can the city's residents not get their priorities straight? Nary a single one had shown up at council's public hearing to oppose the proposal to ban gun-toting in the parks. Do Roanoke residents not understand that to let their parks become ``islands of jeopardy'' would be to kiss goodbye any hopes of booking conventions of gun lobbyists - so numerous at the General Assembly that they could fill every hotel in this valley?

It is well that the NRA and wise men like Thomas and Griffith have intervened. Thank heavens City Council has now been disabused of the notion that it is capable of making decisions governing the city's parks and the safety of its residents.

As for Roanokers who enjoy visiting parks where gunfire's not likely to be part of the wildlife, they can go to state parks, where guns are banned. At least until the gun lobby gets that foolishness straightened out.

by CNB