OT – A Wake Up Call For Naive Jewish Organizations

Hat tip: White Israelite

Dear Fellow Jews,

Since the U.S. Supreme Court decision acknowledging firearm ownership is an American fundamental right, a paradox has arisen. “A number of major Jewish organizations have condemned the decision, which they believe will simply make America a more violent place. They include:

The American Jewish Committee,

Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism,

American Jewish Congress,

National Council of Jewish Women.

The AJ Committee also expressed “disappointment” over the decision, adding: “Gun control protects liberty, rather than restricts it.”‘

However, another Jewish view prevails – that of the successful side of the case (District of Columbia vs. Heller). Here, Alan Gura, lead attorney, said, “Jews, in particular, should take note. It’s puzzling. Many Jews seem to prefer heavy government intervention, and it’s not a good thing.” Jews, he said, “often have the mistaken belief that the government is a beneficent force to always do good and help people out. Statistics indicate that gun ownership tends to reduce crime and increase public safety. Moreover, self-protection is a fundamental right,” he added, “because citizens cannot always depend on the government to protect them from criminals or tyrannical rulers.” Washington Jewish Week, 3 July 08

The 5000+ dues-paying members of the civil rights organization, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (www.jpfo.org), in its Amicus Curiae on the subject case raises the obvious questions of how can Jews who share the Holocaust commonality be so at odds over the issue of the rights and powers of self/race preservation? Here are a few comments from this very well written and poignant legal brief:

“the simple truth – born of experience – is that tyranny thrives best where government need not fear
the wrath of an armed people.’

“If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.”

Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567, 569 (9t~~ Cir. 2003)
(Kozinski, J., dissenting).

“This simple observation by Judge Kozinski encapsulates the core issue that forms the basis and the essential nature of the Second Amendment.”

[Beginning in 1928, a series of Pogroms were issued controlling, restricting, and finally, barring Jews from firearms ownership] “A 1936 memorandum of the Bavarian Political Police documents the procedure:

“‘In principle, there will be very few occasions where concerns will not be raised regarding the issuance ofweapons permits to Jews. As a rule, we have to assume that firearms in the hands of the Jews represent a considerable danger to the German people.”‘

“History illustrates just how readily reasonable regulation of firearms invites large scale abuse by the state and ultimately paves the way for wholesale confiscation of arms and the mass slaughter of the disarmed. (Footnote: ‘ Invariably the proponents of “reasonable” firearms regulations . . . invites the type of abuse which has been rampant worldwide within the last century. One need not strain too hard to imagine the type of broad censorship that could be implemented under the guise of “reasonable” regulation of speech or of the press.’)”


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s