A 31-year old man waiting on a tow truck in the Seattle bedroom community of Des Moines, Washington shot and killed a man who attempted to rob him at gunpoint in what police are calling a crime of opportunity.

According to the Seattle Times, the 31-year old from Renton, Washington had reported his car stolen back on January 18th. A couple of days later, police in Des Moines alerted the man that his car had been found. Rather than having his car impounded, the man told police he would have it towed himself, and drove to where the car had been located on his motorcycle.

While he was waiting on the wrecker to arrive, an SUV pulled up beside him, and 45-year old Randle Cody, Jr. got out and began talking with the man.

The 45-year-old then pulled a gun and demanded the younger man’s backpack, pocketing his weapon as the Renton man handed over the bag, said Mohr. The 31-year-old then pulled out his own gun and the 45-year-old grabbed his gun and fired once, missing the 31-year-old; the 31-year-old returned fire, striking the 45-year-old multiple times, according to Mohr.

The 45-year-old was treated at the scene but died soon after arriving at Seattle’s Harborview Medical Center, Mohr said.

The 31-year-old Renton man and the SUV’s driver were both interviewed by officers and Des Moines police have since sent their case to King County prosecutors to be reviewed. The Renton man was not arrested or booked into jail.

“To my knowledge, it’s just an odd coincidence,” Mohr said of the encounter, adding there’s no evidence the 45-year-old was involved in stealing the Renton man’s car. “The 31-year-old was just a victim of opportunity for the two in the SUV.”

Police say the 31-year old possess a valid concealed carry license, and while the case is being reviewed by prosecutors, it would appear to be a clear-cut case of self-defense.

The attempted robbery and defensive gun use comes as lawmakers in Washington are debating a ban on ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds, and is a pretty good example of why that law would hurt legal gun owners far more than it would impact violent criminals.

In this particular robbery attempt, the armed citizen faced only one attacker, though the driver of the vehicle could also have posed a threat to the man. Criminals don’t care about a fair fight, and we’ve seen plenty of instances of late where multiple assailants have targeted lone victims.

Gun control activists might wonder “why do you need more than ten rounds?” The answer is simple.

I don’t know how many rounds I might need if I’m ever forced to act in self-defense, but I’d rather have too much ammunition on me than not enough. I can’t guarantee that I will ever need to fire more than ten rounds in self-defense, but anti-gun activists can’t guarantee that I won’t need to do so if I’m targeted by multiple attackers, armed robbers, or home invaders.

I believe that magazine bans like the one currently being debated in Washington State are unconstitutional (and at the moment the Ninth Circuit agrees with me), but I don’t think many Democrats in the state legislature really care whether the ban is constitutional or not. They might not care that their proposed law would put legal gun owners at risk either, but Second Amendment activists understand that a magazine ban would be more harmful than helpful in terms of public safety and our civil rights.