- This topic has 46 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by .
-
Posts
-
It’s out in the news that record numbers of American Jews are purchasing firearms.
That’s strange because the majority of American Jews are registered democrats.
It must only be the extremist right wing trumpists going out and buying them….lol
Not in NY unfortunately, where it’s easier to get approved for a billion dollar loan than to get approved for a pistol license.
Those compiling such statistics often are unable to differentiate between what have become, for all purposes, two separate communities. One community is defined by observance of kashrus and Shabbos (which totally define where you can work and live) and tend to be social conservatives and the other is almost totally assimilated into American culture. The former tend to vote Republicans on a national level, and the latter tend to be solid Democrats. If the Democrats are unwilling to expel the wing of their party that supports mass murder of Jews, there may be some shifting. I strongly suspect the increased gun ownership among Jews is among frum Jews, since we are the only ones who can readily be identified as Jews.
“All fifty [50] states permit keeping firearms at home.
Even the City of New York, probably the least permissive
firearms jurisdiction in America, permits the ownership
of loaded long rifles and shotguns, and a twelve-gauge
shotgun with an eighteen-inch barrel is not only suitable
for home protection, but specifically designed for it.”SOURCE: The Wrong Jew: Defeating Those Who Want Us Dead
(chapter 10, page 107) by Hesh Kestin, published in year 2021
in New York, ISBN 9781642935844 * ISBN 1642935840===================
…unlike concealable pistols, long guns require no license.”SOURCE: The Wrong Jew: Defeating Those Who Want Us Dead
(chapter 10, page 112) by Hesh Kestin, published in year 2021
in New York, ISBN 9781642935844 * ISBN 1642935840===================
“American and Israeli Jews are not much different
on matters of relative income, class, religion,
national origin, or political leanings.The singular distinction between them is that
when the chips are down, Israelis are prepared
to fight those who would annihilate them;
from all indications, their American cousins
are prepared to be annihilated.”SOURCE: The Wrong Jew: Defeating Those Who Want Us Dead
(chapter 2, page 14) by Hesh Kestin, published in year 2021
in New York, ISBN 9781642935844 * ISBN 1642935840===================
“Were we all well-known boxers, or karate champions,
or at the very least feared as being the kind of crazy Jew
who fights back, we would have fewer problems.
It is our very helplessness that energizes those who would attack us.”SOURCE: The Wrong Jew: Defeating Those Who Want Us Dead
(chapter 7, page 83) by Hesh Kestin, published in year 2021
in New York, ISBN 9781642935844 * ISBN 1642935840===================
“Schoolyard bullying is part of school life,
and no matter the target, he or she is always
picked on for the same reason: perceived weakness.When this perception is shared by others in the peer group,
we are looking not at a one-on-one situation,
but a situation of all-against-one.Thus, the most efficient way of preventing the latter is to forestall the former.
A Jewish child’s best defense against group violence
is going on the offensive against at least one member
of the group. How? By learning to fight, early and well.Anti-Semites of any age do not mess with
the Wrong Jew, the one who is capable of
inflicting pain and humiliation on his would-be assailants.”SOURCE: The Wrong Jew: Defeating Those Who Want Us Dead
(chapter 9, page 96) by Hesh Kestin, published in year 2021
in New York, ISBN 9781642935844 * ISBN 1642935840SQUARE ROOT:
Incorrect. You need a permit for a long gun in NY as well.A record numbers of American Jews are getting trained and purchasing firearms only means that more jews than usual are getting training and purchasing. Does not say how many owned before and how many now.
Owning a gun has nothing to do with being a republican, democrat or MAGA.
edited
Lostspark, here in the PNW, even tie dyed hippies have weapons and carry permits. I live in a blue state, in a blue county and in a blue town. Most of the folks I know Jewish and gentile are gun owners for a variety of reasons. Your stereotypes aren’t working. Getting a gun and a permit is a long time commitment and expense. You need regular range time and interactive range time and ammo, then there is the range rental, cost of weapons and security for same. For Frum families, strapped for cash and time, the expectation of achieving the competency necessary for safe and accurate gun handling, would represent a significant expense in $ and time.Maybe it’s time for some guns and ammo gremachs?
@square root, what shul does Hesh Kesten belong to?
I don’t and won’t have a gun. But in discussion with the 15 regulars at my daily minyan 12 have guns (and have had them for years).
The 80 year old shul rabbi does not have a gun nor does the only other Democrat in the room.The 12 gun owners are Registered Republicans.
Not a stalker, but as Asst. Registrar of Voters I handle the voting lists regularly.It’s not only Jews. Im pretty well versed in firearms. The government in medium to large cities in USA have abdicated their responsibility to enforce the law. Crime is through the roof. Violent crime is not reliably prosecuted. EVERYONE in medium to large cities is realizing the government is not protecting them and that they themselves are responsible for their safety and their families security. And it’s true. No one is coming to save you if you are the victim of a crime.
The funny thing is liberals want guns too and all of a sudden they don’t want them to be restricted to them – just to everyone else.
Common Saychel: What difference does it make?
The truth is always true, regardless of who speaks it.
The truth is always true, whether it is spoken by a man or a woman.
The truth is always true, whether it is spoken by an adult or a child.
The truth is always true, whether it is spoken by a Jew or a Gentile.
The truth is always true, whether it is spoken by a friend or a stranger.
The truth is always true, whether it is spoken by a tzadik or a rasha.In the Mishnah, tractate Avot, chapter 4, paragraph 1,
Ben Zoma taught that a wise man learn from EVERY person:
even a woman, even a child, even a Gentile, even a stranger, even a rasha.Ben Zoma Omer: Aizeh Hu Chacham? HaLomed MiCol Adam.
@Lostspark
I don’t expect to need protection in shul (besides what the KBH provides).
I don’t know if any of the 12 carry their guns into shul. I haven’t noticed any holsters or weapons to be visible.If the 12 didn’t have guns, it wouldn’t make me want one.
I was made to learn how to fire a rifle in summer camp about 60 years ago. Haven’t handled any gun since.
I don’t want to own one and don’t permit them in my home or offices.Dear Akuperma,
You are incorrect. I know of many barely-frum Republican-leaning Jews. And just as many very frum Jews that vote Democrat.
I suggest you meet more Yidden.
> The government in medium to large cities in USA have abdicated their responsibility to enforce the law. Crime is through the roof.
to put it in prospective, crime in NYC is indeed rising for the last 3 years, but was mostly declining from 2000 to 2020.
murder was 673 in 2000, 292 in 2017, 488 in 2021, 438 in 2022.
robbery 33K 13K in 2018, 17K in 2022
grand larceny is the only one that exceeded 2000 – 49.6K in 2000, 51.5K in 2022@Square Root, because you keep being him up as if he is some authority, there 10s of 1000s of authors self published, so why give him any credence? because of halomed me kol adam? if thats the case the town drunk has an opinion too
I agree with Common Saychel about hesh kestin. His opinions do not hold any weight. He does not write from the torah viewpoint.
Jack – for the most part in America, at least liberals, do not believe individuals should be allowed to own weapons. Not all. But for the most part. I imagine liberals in traditional gun rights states such as say Texas may be different, but for the most part, this is the case. Most American Jews sadly are not Torah observant. That part of their lives must be filled by something and often it is liberalism. So the majority, those who are not observant, for the most part do not believe in gun rights. They believe it is the responsibility of the government to address our safety. It’s kind of funny that at the same time they generally believe the police are racist and are out to murder Black people and should be disarmed. For the most part, it is conservatives who believe in active self protection, and who support gun rights. Most total observant Jews are conservative, and so are more likely to own a firearm as compared to our liberal brethren.
Always ask questions-murder is something that will always be reported. I live in California. A lot of people do not report graffiti, assault, and thievery, because they do not believe the police will arrest the perpetrators and do not believe the prosecutor will prosecute. I guess we have to go with the best numbers that we can but I think much of the population is disillusion about the willingness of leftist prosecutors to go after crime and often do not report. I think this is occurring all over California. Not sure about New York.
Even people who are very anti gun can recognize that when there are going to be gun owners, it’s better to be one of them.
@Keith
I am frum
That is my personal belief and practice
I am a Liberal Democrat who is also a Fiscal Conservative. That is my ‘American Citizen’ personaI am old enough to have suffered discrimination that was legal before the Democrats passed and LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act.
I am an attorney, I also am an adjunct Professor at Law School.
I oppose private ownership of guns by ordinary citizens who are NOT law enforcement or members of the National Guard or Reserve.
I understand the 2nd Amendment and consider the National Guard and Reserves to be the well regulated militia of our times that complies with the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution.
In 1785 they could not imagine the tykes of modern killing machines that now are called guns.
Then guns were necessary to procure food for many outside the few cities, protect against hostile natives, invaders and rebellious slaves.
This is no longer the case.For those who say they only shoot for sport at a shooting range. I say let the business owner the guns and members be allowed to use them on the premises only.
No one needs an AR-15
Keith,
Liberals and Democrats are not against responsible people owning guns. We actually believe in the constitution.
We are intensely troubled that when there is a certain type of gun which is the favorite of mass murderers and has been used to kill thousands of children that Republicans refuse to enact sane common sense gun laws to protect Americans.jackk –
We don’t know each other but on this you are simply wrong. Liberals and democrats are absolutely against private ownership of guns. You may not read or watch the news but this is absolutely incontrovertible. I don’t know if your level of observance precludes reading the secular news and watching the news but there probably is no statement less controversial than that. Perhaps that liberals and democrats generally advocate for abortion and conservatives against. But there aren’t many issues as black and white as gun ownership. Once side wants it abolished (in general) and the other advocates for greater (responsible) ownership.As regards a “certain type of gun,” presumably you are alluding to rifles. The statistics of gun deaths in America however is as follows: The vast majority – between 2/3 and 3/4 of gun deaths in this country is suicide. I think no one thinks that removing guns from law-abiding citizens will meaningfully alter the suicide rate so the majority of gun deaths would be unchanged. The next greatest category is known criminals (gangs, drug dealers, etc). Then a much much smaller number is people who are not known gang members and criminals shooting someone. By far, handguns are the weapons used in the vast majority of gun deaths. By far. In fact if I remember correctly (FBI statistics on murder), I believe knives are used more often than rifles in murder and yet no one in this country is talking about knife control. In Britain however where it is difficult to obtain guns, their murder rate is also high and from knives so they actually ARE talking about knife control. IIRC, I believe the number of people killed from rifles in this country is similar to those killed by hands and feet.
“Liberals and Democrats are not against responsible people owning guns. We actually believe in the constitution.”
Tell that to the guy who posted above you
“No one needs an AR-15”
Even if this were true, since when is this a reason to make something illegal?
Jackk – most recent numbers are 2019
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls2019 – latest data available –
Total murder 13,927
Total firearms 10,258
Total handguns 6,368
Total rifle 364
Total knives 1,476
Total blunt object/ clubs 397
Total hands/feet 600Outlawing knives should reduce the number of murders more than rifles. If we outlawed hands and feet that would reduce murder more than outlawing rifles. Rifles are scary looking but are not a major factor in murder. Not you, but this is the reason it is a target for much of the country that thinks emotionally rather than logically.
CTLawyer – in fact in 1785 they DID have semi-automatic weapons. They were however very expensive and were not profitable to make which is why people didn’t have them. The technology existed. I think the Supreme Court also has been clear that regardless of what you or I think, the Bill of Rights is a statement of personal rights, and specifically (regardless of what you or I think) the second amendment has been repeatedly confirmed by the SC to be an individual right, not a group right. Finally all the laws that people pass are relevant ONLY for law abiding citizens. Ridiculous magazine limitations affect only you and me – not criminals. Criminals will have rifles. And full capacity magazines. The question is not will the law remove them from criminals hands. They are ALREADY prohibited from possession (felons are prohibited). So regardless of what laws are passed, criminals will have these weapons. The only question is – if there is a bang on your door in the night and a home invasion – do you want to defend your family or do you want your only option to be prayer and hope they don’t mean you harm. G-d gave us saichel. We are obligated to go to doctors even though healing comes from Him. We are obligated to work even though parnassa comes from Him. We are obligated to become familiar with self-defense even though protection comes from Him.
Personally I think you are making a mistake and I think you should get the skills necessary for self defense. But that is your decision not mine and I appreciate that in this country we are free to disagree.
Civilian carry lacks a straightforward answer.
If you find yourself in a situation where an assailant has a weapon, you would definitely want to possess a firearm and be proficient in its use. However, it’s essential to consider the likelihood of such situations occurring and the associated responsibilities and challenges of gun ownership.
For example, the leading cause of pediatric trauma deaths has shifted from car accidents to firearm-related incidents.
Moreover, even with training, high-stress situations where your life is in danger can overwhelm your body, causing your stress levels to surpass manageable limits. This can result in a loss of fine motor skills and the capacity to maintain proper focus, potentially leading to harm to innocent individuals more than the assailant or getting you to take unreasonable action.
Finally, in a shooting incident, it’s possible that responding law enforcement may not immediately identify you as the innocent party. As has occurred in past cases, they could mistake you for the assailant, putting you at risk of injury or even death.
However, when reflecting on history, including the pogroms and persecution faced by the Jewish community, there’s an argument for firearm ownership and training. Nowdays, social media can quickly incite conflict, and there may be more individuals with malicious intent than law enforcement can handle. This can result in harm to entire communities.
Consider the recent incident at a Russian airport as a real-life illustration of a ruthless mob targeting Jews without any apparent reason. Similar occurrences have taken place in the past, highlighting the importance of preventing such incidents in the future through appropriate measures, including self-defense training and firearm ownership.
As I initially mentioned, there are valid arguments on both sides of the spectrum.
“For example, the leading cause of pediatric trauma deaths has shifted from car accidents to firearm-related incidents.”
This is a misleading statistic commonly referenced in order to push gun control. While the statistic is true if you include all children ages 1-19, it is not nearly true for each individual age. A disproportionate number of those gun deaths occur among older teenagers, and that is due largely to gang violence.
Meno,
I did read it now, although his post was not up when I posted.
He is talking about the AR-15 and other mass murder weapons . Where did he say we should ban all guns in American ?
And where in the constitution does it day that there can be no common sense gun laws? Where does the constitution say that American can’t do anything to protect against mass murderers killing hundreds of people at a party or kids in school?I just read a teshuva from Rav Ezriel Auerbach where he quoted his brother-in-law Rav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg that owning a gun is comparable to locking your door at night. If you are permitted to lock your door , you are permitted to own a gun too.
Keith,
Show me one bill in congress or one statement from the democratic party that wants to abolish private gun ownership?
@Keith
We won’t agree, but that is part of the greatness of America that we can express our own opinion.
The Supreme Court has a history of overturning its own decisions.
Dred Scott
Massey v Ferguson
Roe v Wade
So I take no solace in hearing the SCOTUS has ruled.
I was a youngster in public school when the Courr ruled in O’hare that I could not be forced to recite Christian prayers. The Republicans are still trying to bring it back and I don’t trust this court packet with unqualified Yrump appointees to make correct legal decisions.
Clarence Thomas is on the take
Bryant is an ignorant fool who isn’t qualified to be a traffic court judge2sxents –
ABSOLUTELY carry without training is frankly irresponsible. If you do not have solid fundamentals and solid practical/tactical training you should not be carrying.
2- regarding pediatric trauma. The study I am aware of that study. This was a terrible study. When they talked about trauma, they talked about people under 20 years old. The vast vast majority of gunshot victims were something like 17 to 19 year olds are on the streets. Not children going to school in the wrong place and the wrong time. More like people in bad areas like Chicago. Not children. More like 17 to 19 year olds where really they are more like adults. I’ve not yet seen a study talking about legitimate children. Say 13 and under.
Jackk- are you serious about there being no evidence politicians want to take away guns? Hilary said in a speech she wants gun confiscation. Beto said he’s coming for our rifles. Biden said he wants to ban them too. You can’t possibly be serious. If you watch the news for an hour or read a single newspaper, it is filled with left-wing politicians talking about banning guns. You really genuinely can’t be serious, right? Or are you not allowed to read newspapers, or watch television news? Most Democratic politicians who have made a statement about guns has said they want to ban rifles and full capacity magazines. I mean I don’t know how to discuss this any further. It is like it is noon and I say the sun is out and you say no it is dark outside. this really is not a controversial topic. Democrats generally want to ban citizens from having guns. Conservatives generally want people to take responsibility for their own safety with the best tools possible. That means guns.
Ctlawyer – I don’t know enough about the first two cases you cited, but I am not aware of any serious person who believes Roe versus Wade was decided correctly. They just kind of made stuff up. As far as I recall, there was never a citation of the constitution that supported roe versus wade. The current court did the right thing which was, if such and such power is not granted by the constitution, it goes to the states. Roe versus Wade was always an abomination. In aggressive court, seizing power, it did not have. The constitution is supposed to give Ltd enumerated powers to the federal government. Everything else belongs to the states. That power is now where it belongs. Liberal states get to have unlimited abortion. Conservative states get to put restrictions on it. If you don’t like what your state is doing, you can convince your neighbors to elect representatives to vote differently. Or you can move. This never should have been of any federal interest.
With that said, the number of times the Supreme Court has overruled itself on any major decision is tiny. Unless the court makes a radical mistake as it did with Roe v Wade it should instead maintain precedence and so hopefully the current understanding of the bill of rights alluding to individual not group rights will stand for a long time.
Lostspark – it has been made abundantly clear to anyone with eyes that the government is not there to protect you from harm. We had riots and civil unrest for two or three years now. It is self evident that the police are not there to protect you from attacks. at this point only someone willfully blind, who intentionally closes, his eyes believes that the police will be there to protect you from attacks. We are, each of us, responsible for our own self-defense, and for the safety of our families. Any law, restricting firearms will be honored only by law, abiding citizens, and not by criminals, of course. if you agree that individuals are responsible for his own defense, and that laws regarding Firearms will only be obeyed by law-abiding citizens, and not criminals the obvious next thought is that you should take whatever actions necessary to be able to provide the best defense for you and your family. In the year 2023 that means Firearms. of course we all have emunah and bitachon but – G-d gave us saichel and sense. We are permitted to use doctors and expected do use the natural order of things in our daily lives. We are expected to live with emunah and bitachon but still exploit how G-d designed the natural order of things. That means when it comes to safety we must use common sense. We are not permitted to stick our fingers in the electrical socket. We are not permitted to make a fire in the middle of our house, where the fire could burn down the house. Similarly, we are responsible for our safety and the safety of our family. I don’t know how many people live in Brooklyn and Manhattan, but come on. If the last three years have taught us anything, it’s that the police are not there to protect you, and the government doesn’t care if a Jewish community is attacked. I don’t understand why someone knowing this would not take reasonable precautions to keep his family safe.
Jackk – as I mentioned rifles are used in a relatively small number of murders. I showed the statistics. By far and away handguns are the guns of choice. So, if you say that, seizing firearms from law, abiding citizens will decrease the murder rate you are really talking about taking away handguns not rifles. Knives are responsible for more murder than rifles. So if knives are responsible for more merger than rifles. So if you really want to address murder, logically it would make sense to make knives illegal. Of course, only law-abiding citizens not criminals would obey those laws. So you would have just removed the ability of guys to defend themselves, leaving weapons only in the hands of criminals. That doesn’t really make sense to me. If you said the police were going to seize the weapons of every criminal, and after they were all disarmed then we could talk about disarming the law-abiding citizens I would say well let’s at least start with disarming the criminals. But it doesn’t make any sense to disarm the law abiding citizens, and leave all the weapons in the hands of the criminals, which is what any law would do.
FYI here is many us senators calling for banning rifles. Joe Biden also called for banning them. As well as full capacity magazines. Also red flag laws that means if someone is accused of being problematic or threatening, they do not receive due process but rather the court can see is their weapons. So if a disgruntled ex girlfriend or employee or ex spouse is angry with you, they can complain to the police and the police will seize your weapons. No due process is what red flag laws mean.
https://www.pbs. org/newshour/amp/politics/what-action-should-be-taken-on-guns-we-asked-every-senator
https://www.whitehouse. gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/03/14/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-new-actions-to-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our-communities-safer/
Hmmm with the expense of gun ownership, will tuition committees consider those expenses when granting discounts?
Keith,
Why are you deliberately confusing “abolishing guns” with a specific type of gun ?
I am pretty sure I was clear that I was differentiating the two, whereas the starter of this thread did not make such a difference and thought that democrats are opposed to owning all guns.
As I said before no democrat wants to ban all guns. All your quotes are about banning specific types of guns.
The following is what Biden and Democrats want to ban. I quote from your link.
“It is within our power to once again ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, to require safe storage of guns, to end gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability, and to enact universal background checks.”There are millions of other types of guns that every American who feels he needs to protect himself can own.
Maybe we should all be allowed to own hand grenades also?
Jack, technically , you’re right. But until recent court decisions striking them down, most Democratic states and cities had such restrictive regulations that made gun ownership impossible
Anonymous,
Which restrictive regulation in a democratic state made gun ownership impossible? Or even in a city ?Jackk – oh my point was that many if not most Democrats want to ban us from having rifles in from full capacity magazines. My next point was that rifles are responsible for relatively few murders in this country. Firearm murders largely are caused by handgun not rifles. In fact as I showed more people are murdered by knives by far than by rifles, so the Democrats goal of banning rifles and Hook about to be magazine will result in very little increase in murder. If they were more people are murdered by knives by far than by rifles, so the Democrats goal of banning rifles and book about to be magazine, will result in very little increase in murder. If they were serious about taking away firearms because of murder, logically they would want to take away handguns. That was my point. Now in their hearts, almost for sure, they do want to ban all firearms. Hillary Clinton called for in Australia, like policy where the government sees nearly all guns from the population. She is one politician that said it explicitly. Others have also said they want policy like Australia where the government took nearly all Firearms from all citizens.
Ability, a da Raba, schools and shuls should be giving discounts to those who are ready to protect the kehilla. Should count as part of chesed and written off as tzedokah. This is not farfetched: halachik thinking about serving in the tzahal includes an idea that even if one feels protected by his learning, there is a tzad of chesed to protect others.
Keith,
Did confiscating 650,000 guns in Australia reduce murders?
Jackk- the murder rate in Australia was decreasing before the mean and continued decreasing exactly the same right after the ban. I don’t believe anyone believes that a change to be changing the murder rate. I just continued the same trajectory it had before.
Jackk- see figure two. The Rand paper says the ban caused decrease in homicide rates but if you look at the data – figure two – you see that the homicide rate continuously decreased from 1980 to 2010 with the exception of the spike. It looks like it is about 1996 or 1997. Otherwise it is a long progressive downward trend in curve. The rate of decrease appears know more after the ban as compared to before.
I heard that recently it became easier to get approved for a gun license even in NY because of what is going on right now in the world.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.