Well-written piece, Robert.

It has constantly amazed me that the Jews in America, whose ancestors have been victims of pogroms and genocide for millennium, should be overwhelmingly for "gun control".

Something is going on out there though. Try buying ammunition these days - there has been a run on it for over a year. Whether it is mainly new people wanting firearms or existing owners hoarding ammunition, I don't know. But a friend of mine has been trying to get an ordered pistol since last Christmas.

The price of .45 ACP ammunition has doubled - but then you probably know that.

Very sensible points all. I agree (although I don't own a gun).

It is so ironic that the Left who espouse the platitudes of peace and brotherhood are so strident and intolerant in their doctrines, and you and Ariel, A"H, who recognize that true peace and righteousness is assured when good men are empowered, are the most tender hearted, and peaceful men I know. I am proud of you both.

From the poet Uri Tzvi Greenberg who, in 1929, wrote the lines: חייל יהודי מתפלל ברובה - a Jewish soldier prays with a rifle, this poem from 1937 in his famous Sefer HaKitrug v'HaEmunah (The Book of Admonition and of Faith):

One Truth and Not Two
by Uri Zvi Greenberg
(interpreted from Hebrew by Laurence Cramer)

Your Rabbis taught: A land is bought with money
You buy the land and work it with a hoe.
And I say: A land is not bought with money
And with a hoe you also dig and bury the dead.
And I say: A land is conquered with blood.
And only when conquered with blood is hallowed to the people
With the holiness of the blood.
And only one who follows after the cannon in the field,
Thus wins the right to follow after his good plow
On this, the field that was conquered.
And only such a field gives nourishing and healthy bread
And the house which arises on its hill is truly a fortress and a temple,
Because in this field there is honorable blood.
Your Rabbis taught: The messiah will come in future generations:
And Judea will arise without fire and without blood.
It will arise with every tree, with every additional house.
And I say: If your generation will be slow
And will not grasp in its hands and forcibly mold its future
And in fire will not come with the Shield of David
And in blood will not come with its horses saddled -
The Messiah will not come even in a far off generation.
Judea will not arise.
And you will be living slaves to every foreign ruler.
Your houses will be straw for the sparks of every wicked one.
And your trees will be cut down with their ripe fruit.
And a man will react the same as a babe
To the sword of the enemy -
And only your ramblings will remain - yours...
And your statue, an eternal curse.
Your Rabbis taught: There is one truth for the nations:
Blood for blood - but it is not a truth for Jews.
And I say: There is one truth and not two.
As there is one sun and as there are not two Jerusalems.
It was written in the Law of Conquest of Moses and Joshua
Until the last of my kings and my traitors have consumed.
And there will be a day when from the river of Egypt until the Euphrates
And from the sea until the mountain passes of Moav my boys will go up
And they will call my enemies and my haters to the last battle.
And the blood will decide: Who is the only ruler here.

I'm a yeshiva-guy-turned-working-stiff. Based on what I know, you're spot-on in terms of the obligation (not just the right) to defend oneself, as well as secular society's aversion to labeling things as good or evil. (It's hard to be permissive if right and wrong exist, you know.)

I do have a hard time squaring my feelings about gun rights with another attitude I was taught in yeshiva. I'm sure you're familiar with it, Robert. "Hakol kol Yaakov v'hayadayim y'dei Eisav - the voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are Esau's hands." (Genesis 27:22, for all you readers of comments.) Classical Jewish thought is that Gentiles defend themselves with arms, but Jewish people turn to prayer - at least as a preferred form of defense. (Tradition has it that Jacob himself prepared for war before his reunion with Esau, 22 years later.) I've got Orthodox Jewish friends, close friends, who collect firearms and travel out to firing ranges on weekends, and I'm not sure what to make of it. (That's aside from the fact that the last time I picked up a rifle, at Camp Stone, I couldn't even nick the target...)

How does your father, the rabbi, feel about that kind of thing?

Thank you so much for sharing Ariel's thoughts. They help me with mine.

" ... I do have a hard time squaring my feelings about gun rights with another attitude I was taught in yeshiva.

"Hakol kol Yaakov v'hayadayim y'dei Eisav - the voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are Esau's hands."

Classical Jewish thought is that Gentiles defend themselves with arms, but Jewish people turn to prayer ... "

i take it to mean, that while Jews should take to Prayer before any battle and in thankfulness after any battle, they "should not rely upon miracles" and be prepared to fight to victory, and then give thanks in Prayer that the victory was from G-D's grace.

There is a well known precedent, in Shulchan Aruch, that if an enemy wants to enter the borders of Israel (also interpreted broadly as any Jewish settlement) only about matters of 'straw and feed', the people are to violate the Sabbath to go out and defend their dwellings and inhabitants.

Very well written Robert. I would bet Ariel would be pleased with your article.

“The sword is not the cause of murder, and there is no sin upon him who made it.”

Such a simple concept so totally ignored by simple liberals. Growing up, almost all my relatives and friends had guns in their homes, often many guns, for hunting and personal defense. Something we all learned at a young age was how to handle, use and respect a rifle. Yet, despite the proliferation of guns, there were no drive-by shootings in any of our neighborhoods. None of the guns were able to fire on their own.

Why do defenders of our civil liberties feel it is just dandy to make it almost impossible to legally own a gun in Chicago or New York? I have a feeling such restrictions on abortion, something not found in the second amendment or anywhere else in the constitution, would have liberals rioting in the streets.

And while Ghandi is revered for his adherence to non-violence, his belief that the German Jews should have willingly offered themselves to the butcher's knife is often left out of his bio. I think even liberals would have a hard time publicly endorsing such a sentiment.

"Classical Jewish thought is that Gentiles defend themselves with arms, but Jewish people turn to prayer ... "

See beginning of Parshas Vayishlach, where Yaakov utitlized three strategies in preparing for his encounter with Esav: he prayed, he sent tribute and he armed himself for war. Jewish thought doesn't get more classical than Yaakov Avinu, and he's with Robert and Ariel.

I like the Israeli model. Everybody has a gun but they are trained and there is discipline. I have never heard of a 6 year old Israeli child accidentally shooting a sibling or a dispute between neighbours turning into a gunfight.

Ted:

Switzerland is another good model. The Swiss have a lot of guns, are trained how to use them and don't seem to be plagued with innocent kids getting shot during a drive-by.

But no, liberals want to emulate Great Britain when they talk about European gun laws.

Ted, Johnny:

Little known factoid: the Israeli citizen army is modeled on the Swiss army.

I dont have a problem with gun ownership for personal protection of one's self and family.

However I don't buy the argument that it is going to stop the government from cracking down. Maybe 100 years ago, but not today.

The military has training and weaponry that ordinary citizens cannot touch. In this hypothetical scenario if they really wanted to crack down we'd lose.

But like I said I haven't any problem with gun ownership for self defense in general.

Jack:

I'm not sure protection from government tyranny is the biggest reason to own guns. The government has more firepower, though if you look at Iraq you can do a lot of damage to an army with small weapons. I doubt you could find five members of the NRA that buy guns in preparation to fight the government.

Still, it is nice to at least have the government remember that the citizens are armed. It is even better if criminals know citizens are armed.

What an excellent article and discussion! I enjoyed and learned much. Growing up in Wyoming, I'm a classic 'westerner'. I believe in both prayer and being prepared to protect myself and my family.

Mr. Avrech, you did your beautiful son justice by writing his thoughts and reflections. You must be so proud of the man he became. Isn't it funny, how we can both weep and rejoice over our children? Blessings....

I'll add my thanks also, for your putting down Ariel's thoughts. Incredible stuff, helpful as always...and Ariel, it seems, had so much more wisdom at a younger age than most.

It is not a tragedy when people are killed in a flood, a fire or an earthquake. It is a disaster. Dis-aster, as in astrology, bad horoscope, plain bad luck. It is a tragedy when a bunch of fraternity brothers, full of a youthful sense of invulnerability, get drunk, drive, kill themselves and other people in a crash.

Interestingly, the Germans have taken the lesson to heart. The Grundgesetz (Basic Law) recognises the right to keep and bear arms as fundamental; it's precisely as a safeguard against tyrrany and injustice. You can usually buy guns in the same shop as knives, razor blades and canteens of cutlery! Just another lawful purchase!

Spot on, as usual, Robert!

There is a school of thought that says that although we are obligated in self-defense; nevertheless, the nature of the threat determines our response.

The difference between the story of Chanukah versus the story of Purim indicated 2 schools of thought. The Maccabis of Chanukah staged a revolt, fought a battle, and won a war.

The people of Shushan fasted and prayed for 3 days.

The Chofetz Chaim explained that each response is appropriate in its time: Haman threatened us with physical extermination. We responded spiritually. The Greeks threatened us spiritually, culturally. We responded with physical battle.

The Chofets Chaim purportedly said, that had he realized what the communists had in mind he would have bought a gun and fought a battle with them.

Apparently, the maskilim put on a play making fun of this approach, wherein they dressed up 2 actors as the Chofets Chaim and R' Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky. They were dressed as soldiers, armed with rifles and shot at the revolting Bolsheviks.

When R' Chaim Ozer was told about this event, he apparently, smiled and said, "We would have won."

Avi:

Thanks so much for the informative comment. Great story about the Chofetz Chaim.

One question: The Jews in the story of Purim also fought pitched battles. First they prepared themselves spiritually and then they fought a war of self defense, right?

"Obviously, as a minority in the Persian Empire, Jews were forbidden weapon ownership. "

Do you have any source for this obvious statement?

"I doubt you could find five members of the NRA that buy guns in preparation to fight the government."

Really? Consider, for example, the following statements from NRA national board members:

"Twentieth Century military machines are far from invincible when outflanked by armed citizen guerrillas."

- Sue Wimmershoff-Caplan

"The people have a right, must have a right, to take whatever measures necessary, including force, to abolish oppressive government."

-Wayne LaPierre

Excellent piece.

I have found that convincing my Jewish friends to join me at the range is the best argument. Once they learn to safely handle firearms, they realize that all the myths and lies they've been told about guns are exactly that.

In particular, I have found that Jewish professionals, doctors, lawyers, etc. have a natural interest in precision shooting sports once exposed to it.

We just have to be persistent in our efforts.

Danny:

Our sources are Megillat Esther, numerous midrashim and the Talmud.

Regarding gun control and an unarmed citizenry, here's some valuable information:

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000. Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.

With guns, we are citizens. Without them, we are subjects.

Can you also give examples of places where there were no oppressive regimes or dictatorships and where people still died in large numbers because there was gun control?

I think citizens should be allowed to own firearms, but there should be a limit on what kind of firearms can be owned. I would not be comfortable with my neighbor owning a plutonium implosion bomb or AK 47.

On a different note, there's a book named "Why are Jews Liberals?" which was reviewed recently in the WSJ which I think you might be interested in:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204488304574427312061008166.html

Davo, I'll pass on the extreme of a nuke; do you distrust your neighbor so much that you think he'd kill you if he owned an AK?

I would argue that the crime situation in formerly Great Britain is a fine argument that gun control disarms the honest, and leaves them helpless before the predators.

I will also note that it's not a case of citizens being 'allowed' to own arms here; that is one of the basic enumerated rights in the Constitution. IN the Heller case, all nine justices agreed that the 2nd Amendment speaks of a pre-existing right of individuals(the fact that four of them immediately tied themselves in knots trying to say "But states and cities can ban them anyway" does not change that).

I'll point you to Joe Huffman's One Question:
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?
and his thoughts on this, found here:
http://blog.joehuffman.org/2004/12/15/JustOneQuestion.aspx
And, just for argument, his 'Jews in the attic' test,
http://www.joehuffman.org/Freedom/JewsInTheAttic.htm

Thanks for this well-written, well-thought-out post and the accompanying references. As a Christian, I am familiar with the aphorism that we are not to "test" or "try" G-d. It is up to us to use the blessings--capabilities, opportunities, and things--that G-d has granted to us. Yes, we are to pray--that is our strongest and best "weapon," but it should not be unthinkable that the means to self-defense and defense of others is, itself, an answer to prayer.

On the secular side of things, it should be noted that the proliferation of violence in the United States (and in the UK) coincides very closely with the inception and growth of the welfare state, beginning with LBJ's "Great Society" with a parallel increase in so-called "gun control." In short, these "programs" (perhaps better named, "pogroms") have had the opposite from their intended effects. Welfare, intended to be a "hand up" incentivized the break-up of family and positive community structures, removed the incentive to work, particularly in entry-level positions where all unskilled labor must start, truly enslaving the poor to an inhuman, hydra-like bureaucracy. And gun control made it difficult or wholly unlawful for good, law-abiding citizens to possess the means for self-defense, so that only government actors and criminals could have guns and the means to use them, defensively or offensively. This, too, is little more than slavery. On the other hand, since passage of "will issue" concealed handgun permit legislation, in every state that has it, the violent crime rate, previously on the rise through the end of the 1980's, began to decline or at least stopped rising. Anecdotally, in my quite high-crime urban home-town, on the rare occasion when a citizen defends him/herself with a personal firearm, there is an immediate, notable reduction in crime--the criminals no longer feel so bold. The sheep have teeth.

Jett:

Thanks so much for the kind words and for the articulate history lesson. Do stay in touch.

It is pleasing to read an article that sets out such a simple, to-the-point argument for the lawful possession of firearms by private individuals. In addition, framing the presentation around the words of a beloved son makes it all the more powerful.

The 'State' invariably decays from vigour to inertia, from freedom to restraint, and as this transformation progresses, it begins to fear the very citizens it was created to protect. From my observation point up here in the 'great white north', it is with sadness and sorrow that this decay is so prominently apparent in my grand neighbour to the south. Perhaps the two seminal events that marked the overt declaration by the American 'State' that it would use its self-sanctioned power of violence, without restraint, against those citizens it feared were the murders committed by the FBI at Ruby Ridge (August, 1992) and the massacre initiated by the ATF at the Waco Compound in the spring of 1993. Both government agencies acted in a manner which signaled their belief that they were above the law and able to act without restraint. The deaths on both sides stemming from the defensive reactions of the victims were used to justify a massive 'State' assault on the Second Amendment rights of all citizens.

The Waco event in particular was unforgivable as the ATF could have merely exercised a modicum of patience and arrested Koresh on the street while he was shopping - unarmed - in the local town, thus avoiding the bloodshed. Viewing tapes of the pre-assault briefings shows a group of heavily armed, over-equipped, and oblivious-to-reality 'boys' eager to pay with their toys. Tellingly, not the slightest ounce of adult prudence is evident.

These criminal acts expose a government acting with unnecessary violence to suppress the both the right and ability of its people to defend their liberty. Why?? Perhaps the French adage, ...pour encouragez les autres!, applies, namely the intent to terrorize any similar-thinking citizens into submission. Here in Canada, although we have exceptionally strict 'gun control', our Liberal Party governments still strive continually to bring about the complete disarming of us all, and we Canadians are a rather meek lot compared to you, n'est-ce pas?

It is my hope that this fine article opens the eyes of at least a few of those previously oblivious to the real threat posed by openly mendacious purveyors of 'gun control'. If it does, then that awakening will be a celebration of, and an exquisite memorial to, the life of Ariel Chaim...