In an op-ed, the editorial board of the Kansas City Star discussed the tragic murder of North Kansas City police officer Daniel Vasquez, who was killed during a traffic stop. “North Kansas City should quickly remember his service in an appropriate way. The killing is another terrible reminder of the price we pay for lax gun laws, particularly in Missouri — and the ongoing need to change the gun culture and stop senseless murders in the state,” the authors wrote.

KMBC News reported:

Joshua Rocha, 24, is accused of murder and armed criminal action following the death of Officer Daniel Vasquez, 32.

According to court documents, the incident began when Vasquez pulled over Rocha about 10:40 a.m. because he had a temporary, expired tag for his license.

Court documents stated that dashcam video from the officer’s police cruiser captured what happened at that traffic stop. Those court records state that Vasquez was shot while Rocha was still in his car.

Then the records state Rocha left his car and shot the officer several more times while the officer was on the ground.

Rocha fled the scene and attempted to disguise himself by shaving his goatee. But he later turned himself in to the authorities and admitted to shooting the officer because “[h]e did not want to go to jail or have his vehicle towed” because of expired tags, according to court documents. He is facing first-degree murder and armed criminal action charges.

Investigators told reporters at a press briefing that they did not yet know where Rocha obtained the rifle used in the shooting. Nevertheless, the Kansas City Star still contended that more gun restrictions are needed to stop these types of incidents.

The author urged state lawmakers to “broadly review Missouri’s gun laws, which generally allow adult drivers to carry concealable weapons in their vehicles” because a state law “prohibiting pistols in cars would not have prevented this shooting.”

But then, the author makes an important admission:

Any suspect willing to shoot a police officer will not obey a law banning weapons in his or her car. It’s already against the law for anyone to fire a weapon from a motor vehicle, or at one, unless it’s in self defense.

Well, there it is.

Passing a law outlawing the carrying of rifles in a vehicle would have done nothing to stop Rocha from killing Vasquez. Still, the author argues that the state’s lack of stricter gun laws “reinforce a culture that says guns are the easy answer to almost any dispute.”

The article goes on to lament the reality that officers have to “assume that the driver of a stopped car is armed and dangerous,” calling it “appalling and unacceptable.”

The authors are right – police should not have to fear for their lives when conducting a traffic stop. However, the laws put forth by anti-gunners would not mitigate this issue. Anyone willing to follow such a law is unlikely to be the type of person that would shoot a police officer for pulling him over even if there were no such laws.

But even worse, stopping people from carrying arms in their cars could cost more lives because it deprives them of the ability to defend themselves if they are threatened. Those obeying the rule could be in even more danger – especially if they happen to live in a high-crime area.

The murder of Officer Vasquez is tragic. But punishing law-abiding gun owners would not have prevented his death, nor will it keep anyone safe in the future. Using his death in this way is a cynical political ploy designed to support the effort to disarm responsible citizens. Unfortunately, those supporting such legislation do not understand that they will only create more victims if they succeed.