A Greater Good

Sacrifice for Survival

I wonder about human nature a lot. Six million years of evolution has done wondrous things – given us big brains with an instinct for survival at its roots. And along the journey of time, it refined certain traits to add to that primal urge, at one time making us the same, yet individual. And when we layer the input we've received from our separate cultural experiences on the road to modern us, well, we are simultaneously complicated and simple.

I want to give you an example before I dive into what's on my mind. Humankind's earliest ancestors – as far back as 2.8 million years ago – left evidence of belief and reverence for a higher power. This, I believe, is elemental to evolutionary survival. Those tribal ancestors observed life and death and, being human, needed an explanation. Wanted control over their tribe, family, and, to the extent possible, their fate. Prayer and offerings worked as currency to influences in their lives that they couldn't touch or see. Things like storms, stars, births, and death. In general, it appears spiritual practices from the time of our early ancestors proved favorably adaptive throughout our evolution. In the era of technology and AI, a majority of people on Earth continue to worship and adhere to religious beliefs, exercising deeply held connection to a benevolent higher power.

There are other beliefs we hold close, and many are related to our collective survival. To bring this idea down-home, think about things we agree to agree about. In America, we agree that speed limits on roadways are reasonable and acceptable. We also agree that violating those limits is worthy of punishment. We believe in the collective survival value of speed limits.

Other beliefs include principles that go to the American core. We have allegiance to principles that built our country (as other people do to theirs). From the earliest days of immigrant colonists, the principle of individual freedom has been a foundational belief (For colonists, if not for the indigenous people they displaced). We also hold dear the belief that people should be free to worship as they please. These principles are wrapped nicely in the phrase "liberty, life, and the pursuit of happiness."

Clearly, firearm ownership is historically embedded in our history. Before the 19^th century, when this country was in the process of becoming a nation, we were overwhelmingly rural – a vast spread-out land with unknown threats from wildlife, renegades, and pushback from the Native people whose land early settlers confiscated. It was not individuals with military weapons acting out anger, grievances, and delusions, slaughtering random people in places like schools, businesses, and public venues.

The blossoming of our current gun rights began with the formation of the National Rifle Association, which has evolved from promoting opportunities for hunting, target shooting, and fighting wars. By the mid-1900s, when the NRA became a powerful political force, the mission expanded, and ownership of automatic weapons became a fundamental, protected American right (with few exceptions). Let me now add - for readers who hold this right dear – I understand and make no judgment. I am coming to my opinion based on decisions we as a country agreed on. Things like the aforementioned right to religious freedom,  the right to petition and assemble, and other constitutional principles dear to the American heart.

But, I'm also looking at the frightening trend in which the number of people killed in mass shootings has escalated dramatically– emphasized recently by the killing of 18 people and injury of 13 more in Lewiston, Maine. So far this year, 560 people have been killed in mass shootings. Of those, 259 were children. If the perpetrators of gun violence with automatic weapons had no access to the weapons of war, we'd be looking at far different statistics.

I think about other aspects of American life that we identify with our deep commitment to freedom. Consider our traffic laws for a moment – we agree to obey speed limits even though masses of drivers surrender the right to drive as fast as they'd like. This, in favor of safety for the greater good. We have laws regarding food safety, workplace conditions, schooling for our children, workplace safety, product safety, and other aspects of life in America that prohibit people from engaging in actions that threaten harm. We agree to sacrifice certain personal freedoms to protect the greater good. Military firearms in America seem to enjoy special exception despite evidence of significant harm.

I wonder when and if we might rethink the perceived benefits of readily available assault gun ownership in light of the explosion of mass shootings in today's America. Would the 'greater good' be served by limiting the ownership of sophisticated weapons designed for warfare - as opposed to those for marksmanship and hunting?

Historically, when federal and state governments log significant increases in highway accidents and deaths - rules of the road are altered in favor of driver safety. There are laws against underage drinking, when and where folks can shoot off fireworks, where hazardous waste can be discarded, and other acts that some people perceive as personal rights. None of these is as dangerous and impactful as an assault weapon in the hands of an angry, unstable, suicidal individual.

So, here's what I'm saying. I'm not judging gun ownership and recreational shooting (in the past, I wasn't too bad at target shooting). Is it not possible for gun-loving Americans to relinquish the right to own high-capacity magazine and assault rifles on behalf of our shared safety? Clearly, without access to these weapons of war, the number of lives lost to mass shootings will diminish. Not for the first time - the U.S. holds a tragic record – the most mass shootings among high-income countries throughout the world. Surely, American gun enthusiasts can sacrifice a perceived freedom for public safety.

A version of the AR-15 was used to mow down 154 people just this year. If the shooters had no access to high-capacity automatic weapons, that number would have been dramatically lower. The overall numbers and aftermath of mass shootings is overwhelming, as this piece by the Washington Post graphically shows.

 A large-capacity magazine is typically defined as any magazine or drum that can hold more than 10 to 15 rounds of ammunition. The data shows that when assault weapons are used, 155 percent more people are shot and 47 percent killed. We can literally save lives by banning weapons of war.

Why would we not agree to do that – for our greater good?

---

Thank you for being with me through good and bad, light-hearted and deadly serious. I hope (if you are here in America) that you enjoy a fulfilling Thanksgiving - family, friends, and gratitude. This year, fraught with strife and way too much bad news, I am thankful for all of you - you give me purpose and opportunity each week. Send me your thoughts at darby@darbypatterson.com

Please… pass along to folks you think would enjoy my weekly column. Thank you!