Pandora’s Ammo Box
In Greek mythology, Pandora was given a box from the gods that contained special gifts, but was told not to open it. Curiosity won out. Pandora opened the box that unleashed sickness and hardship on the world.
Today, ‘opening Pandora’s Box’ connotes the law of unintended consequences when an innocent and perceived beneficial act unleashes an unanticipated curse or hardship. Once opened, the escaped contents cannot be recovered.
Coincidentally or not, the Supreme Court’s pronouncement on the right to bear arms in the Heller case in 2008, prefaced an increasing number of mass shootings. Curiously, the Court waited over 200 years to review the extent of the Second Amendment’s protection when it determined that the right to bear arms applied not only to a well-armed militia, but to all individuals’ right of self-defense.
Some suggest that our Supreme Court left Pandora’s Box ajar. Perhaps that decision would not have been so charged if decided a hundred years earlier before the advent of AK-47’s and bushmasters that super-charge crazed trigger fingers. Indeed, mankind’s technological advances in firearms—so celebrated in times of war in defense of our country—bedevil the innocent in times of ‘peace’. Temporarily, only the pandemic stopped what seems to be a tri-annual carnage in this country. Yet, when we loosened Covid restrictions, mass shooters reemerged as if the crazies awaited an all-safe signal to return to action.
The unintended consequences of the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment decision relates not to the Constitutional protection to bear arms for self-defense per se, but rather the perceived extent of that Amendment’s protections, and the further polarization of the issue of ‘gun control’. One side brands the other as NRA right wing gun nuts; the other side as left wing Pollyannas who fail to appreciate that felons will obtain guns no matter the law.
Any legislative proposal to regulate firearms—longer waiting periods to purchase; elimination of unlicensed gun dealers; restrictions on automatic weapons—leads to howls of protests that ‘Liberals want to take our guns away.’ The opposition girds themselves in what they perceive as the Constitution’s bullet-proof vest when they oppose any limitations on the right to bear arms. Our own Missouri state legislators propose bills negating any federal law that ‘infringes’ on gun rights as a violation of the Second Amendment. Except that the Supreme Court left open unresolved issues regarding the extent of permissible gun restrictions. Meanwhile, proponents of gun restrictions–not abolition–continue to fire blanks.
For now, we can only seek solace that the odds of being killed or maimed in a mass shooting align with the odds of winning a typical state lottery (opposed to the mega lottery with odds more in line with being struck by a meteor). Call it the Reverse Lottery, where one loses by winning if the power ball that bears one’s number suddenly appears as hot ammo headed his or her way.
However, unlike a state lottery where we can choose to purchase a chance ticket or not, the Reverse Lottery assigns shooting gallery numbers to all—whether we want a chance ticket or not. We can only hope that a gun-toting Grim Reaper misses his capricious mark aimed in our direction if he pulls a luckless number from the murder hopper.
The tale of Pandora’s Box tells us that the ill-fated attempt to belatedly close the Box came too late as evil and hardship escaped and wreaked havoc on the world. Only Hope remained in the Box, stuck under the lid. For now, all we have is Hope that we can find common ground to try to stop the senseless carnage, and that the next bullet spray misses the mark if it comes our way.
5 replies on “Pandora’s Ammo Box”
You are always a good read Paul… hopefully the ajar box will soon lead us to intelligent conversation and some common ground decisions and policies concerning America’s gun problems…
Agree, I don’t understand why politicians on both sides cannot come together on simple issues that would help. Most responsible gun owners have no problems with background checks, why should they? For 50 and 100 round clips, personally I have no problem with eliminating them. As to the so called “assault weapons” there is a lot of debate on that. My father has one that he shoots at the gun range and until recently competed in shooting matches with it. The top shooters use them in the matches. I also agree with the red flag laws that allow temporary removal of firearms from a person who might harm themselves or others. There are laws on the books that would help if enforced . What I don’t think would help is registering all firearms or banning them.
Paul, I always enjoy your writings. I agree with everything you outlined on owning guns. Something certainly needs to be done. There are so many broken things in America and our dysfunction only perpetuates the problems. I own multiple guns, but would happily see stronger law take effect. I would close loop holes at gun shows. Get rid of 50 and 100 round clips. I would even consider a ban on assault rifles, but need more data. I saw a wonderful piece of content on how Switzerland handles their love of guns, but balances it with strong gun laws in which responsible individuals take classes. I wish I had all the answers.
Paul, another thought provoking essay.
The difficulty in finding common ground is that this is one of those issues where both sides are right. The constitution has been interpreted to say we have a right to own firearms. On the other side, no one wants to be a victim of gun violence. Gun right advocates are afraid of the same slippery slope that pro-choice supporters fear. Life begins at conception. (But does personhood?) We want to be free and able to control our own bodies. An infringement here, a limitation there and at some point the right (to own firearms, to privacy) is illusory. It is not the first few reasonable restrictions that are of concern, but the unknown number to follow. Let the camel’s nose in the tent, and pretty soon you are sleeping with the beast. That said, I believe gun-right supporters do a disservice to their cause when they challenge expanded waiting periods, age requirements, limits on magazine size.
I just purchased a MO Lottery ticket. Hoping that I am a winner there and not in the reverse lottery.
Conundrum. Guns so prolific now that arguments for gun limits are academic. We can only hope to slow proliferation by expanded waiting periods, age and mental health checks, and limits on magazine size. It’s a scary world out there.