Beatifying Aaron — while ‘disappearing’ him

Yes, David old friend. “Some will no doubt object to this.”

Word came out earlier this week (to those not previously in the know) that JPFO founder Aaron Zelman received a postumous “Bill of Rights Award” at Alan Gottlieb’s 2014 Gun Rights Policy Conference.

Now, the GRPC is a big deal and surely few people on this planet deserve a Bill of Rights award more than Aaron (my friend, co-author, and tireless crusader for ALL the Bill of Rights).

But as fellow TZP blogger Sheila Stokes-Begley wrote in an email: “Coming from SAF, is this a little like Obama congratulating someone for being an excellent constitutional scholar? They may well be an excellent constitutional scholar, the problem lies in knowing the compliment came from a man who wouldn’t know a constitutional scholar from a cartoonist.”

As you may know, TZP was created in response (and in protest) to the Gottlieb/SAF buyout of JPFO. Short version of the story: Aaron Zelman was a man who never compromised on any issue of principle and Gottlieb never met a compromise he didn’t like.

—–

In the post linked above, David Codrea notes that he was “… invited to an evening working meeting/closed-door advisory session supplemental to the GRPC, and heard no evidence that there were plans to bastardize the mission, and plenty of plans to make the organization viable without involving compromises.”

Though I surely wish I could have been a fly on the wall at that meeting, I don’t doubt David’s description at all. David is a hero of gun rights and a man of great integrity. When he and the very sweet Kurt Hofmann decided to stay on with the new JPFO when Nicki, Sheila, Brad, Ilana, and I left, I wished them well.

But I admit I laughed when I read David’s description of that meeting. Because of course Gottlieb and Co. are not going to have a meeting in which they rub their hands together like cartoon villains and cackle “Bwaahahaaaa!” while they eeeeevilly plot to turn JPFO from a no-compromise outfit into some watered-down imitation of itself.

That’s not the way it works. In the world of corporations and politics, inconvenient predecessors are gotten rid of and policies and views are mutated … politely. Just as SAF is doing.

First they pull the cagey (though rather painfully obvious) PR stunt of “honoring” Aaron to show that they’re really not such bad guys after all. But that’s a cheap, meaningless gesture. It fools only those who haven’t been watching closely. Then they’re going to make some improvements to sadly neglected portions of JPFO’s infrastructure (oh, that creaky old website!). They may come out with a few new projects. They’ll almost certainly use Gottlieb/Merrill’s huge fundraising operation to bring in a lot more money. At first things will look GOOD! GOOD! GOOD! By golly, look what wonders SAF is doing to save the legacy of Aaron Zelman and preserve gun rights!

Then slowly, over a period of years, they’ll turn JPFO into …

… into what, it’s hard to say. Will it just be some bland, almost-forgotten thing? That’s what KeepAndBearArms.com became after Gottlieb bought it. One of the most lively, popular gunsites on the ‘Net is now a backwater.

Or will JPFO live and appear to thrive while subtly toning down its positions?

At this point, nobody can say. I can only say that it’s simply not within Gottlieb’s character to perpetuate Aaron’s character.

Very likely the first real test will be how the new JPFO responds the next time Gottlieb pushes for universal background checks. Don’t ever forget that Gottlieb called Manchin-Toomey a “win” and a “godsend.” Although he eventually removed his support from that particular bill, he still advocates universal background checks. He was still pumping hard for them at this year’s GRPC.

And this was after buying JPFO, folks. This was during the same weekend as that meeting to pretend that JPFO will be allowed to live “without compromises.”

So tell me this: Next time Gottlieb pushes his UBC agenda, what will JPFO’s staff and writers do? Go along quietly? Keep their mouths shut? Actually agree with Gottlieb?

Or will they — as they would do if JPFO remained its real self — shout to the rooftops that UBCs are wrong, dangerous, anti-rights, a front door to registration, and a backdoor to confiscation? Will JPFO’s spokespeople bravely inform the world that Gottlieb is selling us all out?

And if JPFO writers and staff actually did have the courage and fortitude to speak up and oppose their boss, what will SAF and Gottlieb do then? Will Gottlieb applaud and say, “Isn’t it great? See, I really meant it when I said I wanted JPFO to remain hardcore and uncompromising?”

Or will he purge the purists (or let them quit in protest and replace them with more compliant types) and continue what was always inevitable — making JPFO over in his own image?

Time will decide. Maybe — could be — Gottlieb will give up his advocacy of universal government control of firearm sales and avoid that potential conflict. But he and some of his shadier minions can wave awards over Aaron’s grave every day of the week and it wouldn’t change a thing. “Honoring” dead people is one of the tidier ways of turning them into powerless pictures on a wall, names on a plaque, hallowed (and ignored) institutions — and therefore shoving their real, inconvenient views out of the conversation.

—–

* Shady minions do not include David, Kurt, or webmaster Chris, who are all great people worthy of high regard.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

The future of the Second Amendment

I’ve written about Shyanne Roberts before. She’s a terrific kid and a champion shooter. I consider her the future of gun rights in America and what every child interested in shooting should look to as an example.

I’ve spoken to Shyanne on the phone. We spent nearly an hour talking about her sport, her future, and her dreams. She’s a sweetheart. She has a wide range of interests that includes things that every normal 10-year-old likes, such as music and cooking, and some that are considered unusual in the culture of fear and apprehension that seems to have permeated our once proud society.

In a world where shrieking shrews and power-hungry politicians try to disarm the populace and turn it into a herd of compliant sheep, Shy Roberts wants to be an inspiration.

“Kids and guns don’t always mean bad things happen.”

In a world where kids are taught to be afraid of tools of defense, and to rely on others for their own safety, Shyanne Roberts is a breath of fresh air.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

But If It Saves Just ONE Life!

How many times have we heard the plaintive cry from the anti-gun crowd? More gun/people control is needed to save just one life. You can tell how much life matters to the anti-gun crowd when the call for “SWATing” of innocent open carry citizens is suggested and celebrated. Even when it results in the death of two innocent people. One of who died of a heart attack after watching another innocent man be gunned down by the police. And Mommies Demanding Atrocities celebrated their death. Yep, if it saves just one life. Whine on. And people take Mommies Demanding Atrocities seriously. SERIOUSLY? Why?

According to this article:

“If you sync the phone call to the footage,” Bob Owens tells me, “you’ll notice that Ronald Ritchie, the caller, makes claims that are not true.” Among those claims, the Guardian records, were that “Crawford was pointing the air rifle at customers,” that he threatened “two children,” and that he was recklessly “waving it around.” This does not appear to have been the case. Indeed, when the lattermost statement was made, Owens notes, “the gun’s muzzle was pointed to the ground.” So pronounced are the discrepancies between Ritchie’s story and the surveillance footage that John Crawford’s family is hoping to take legal action. “He’s basically lying with the dispatchers,” the family’s attorney, Michael Wright argues. “He’s making up the story. So should he be prosecuted? Yes, I believe so.”

In this case a black man was shot because of a false police call made by Ronald Ritchie.

A radio show host has called for people that open carry to be gunned down by the police, according to this article he hates guns, and the police, so figures pitting them against each other is a great idea. The fact he has to lie, put every innocent person at risk doesn’t seem to trouble him a bit. But then he is a liberal, and anti-gun idiot. But I repeat myself. He doesn’t care that the open carry advocate is innocent, he doesn’t care that the other people around are innocent, he doesn’t care that the police that show up are innocent. He just wants them dead, because after all, guns are evil, they kill people. Life is so important to him, he’s willing to kill off a few innocent people to save just one.

My solution to people like Ronald Ritchie? I think he needs to be charged with premeditated murder. He knew what would happen when he lied to the Police and told them Mr. Crawford was threatening children. I think anyone, especially Mommies Demanding Atrocities, that SWAT someone because they are opening carrying should be charged with premeditated murder.

Ok, hang on to the saddle horn, we’re going to make a jump sideways.

If you look at what is going on in Ferguson, MO right now you see a mess. A black man was shot by a white police officer. While this is fine with Mommies Demanding Atrocities if he was doing nothing wrong and innocently carrying a BB gun through a Walmart, it’s not ok if he may have been in the process of assaulting a police officer. Initially the media portrayed him as this “gentle giant”. That narrative kind of came off the rails when video surfaced of him assaulting a store clerk a bit before his run in with the police. Oops. Then it was the Police “gunned him down” needlessly. Well, it seems forensics may not exactly bear that out.

Then protesters rioted, torched stores (it seems they left a tatoo parlor being guarded by armed owners with those “deadly, no sporting purpose, evil black rifles” alone) demolished a Quick Trip to achieve justice for Michael Brown. Um, well, hmm. While it may have appeared to the rest of the country that the Ferguson Police were a bunch of racist Barney Fifes running around with an itchy trigger finger (and who knows, maybe they are) but what has not been pointed out is that a large portion of those arrested are not, in fact, from Ferguson. Duane Lester of The Missouri Torch did a lovely job of detailing some of the out of town guests that showed up to the party. One of the first being Greg “Joey” Johnson, a communist revolutionary arrived fresh from Chicago, to stir the unrest. Photos too!

ACORN was also involved, as were the Black Panthers. You know, they ones that showed up during the Trayvon Martin debacle. Sort of Govenor Jay Nixon did his best barak obama impression by stating “a vigorous prosecution must now be pursued” of the officer that shot Michael Brown. Wrong Way Jay might have wanted to wait till some actual facts came in before he said that. But since obama had already used “the police acted stupidly” I guess he was trying to come up with the next best idiot line before someone else thought of it. Some of the other out of town guests were Code Pink, RevCom, the New Black Panthers, Socialist Party USA.

Several pictures have come out of Ferguson with the cops suited up like the military, and there were certainly charges of heavy handedness. I do not like seeing local police with tanks, humvees, nor do I like seeing them act like they are fixin’ to storm Bin Laden’s lair. That being said, they have families, they want to go home of a night in one piece. I understand. There are certainly an abundance of out of town scum that are there trying to stir the people up into a frenzy and they want more rioting and social unrest. Heck, just yesterday a anti-gun state Senator got herself arrested drunk and carrying a gun. She has a CCW. What a shocker. She’s anti-gun for thee, but not for, well, herself.

So where am I going with all this? While I don’t want to open carry because I choose not to give away my tactical advantage and because it scares the sheep, I don’t want to deny those that want to do so their rights. Those in my state, with a CCW have undergone a FBI background check, taken a class and passed a proficiency exam and written test. All necessary to utilize your Second Amendment rights in this state. Can Mommies Demanding Atrocities PROVE they are such law-abiding citizens? I doubt it. The Police and the CCW or Open Carry people SHOULD be allies. We are the law-abiding ones that just want to be left alone, we want to protect ourselves and our families. We don’t bother anyone, and we don’t want anyone to bother us. We don’t riot and burn down Quick Trips, we don’t SWAT people because we disagree with them politically hoping they will be killed. We don’t go out and incite people to attack the police. And yet, the left, the people of “tolerance” are the ones showing up, inciting strife and suggesting it’s a great idea to walk out of a restaurant without paying or make a false police report hoping it results in the death of an innocent person.

And people listen to these moonbats when they call for more gun control howling “if it saves just one life”? Inconceivable!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhXjcZdk5QQ

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

How Did Canadian Killer Get A Shotgun? Give Me A Break!

As much as I love Canada—I’m a citizen—I could not live in a place that practically outlaws the right to defend life and property. Ordinary Canadian citizens are de facto barred from owning firearms. Read Second-Amendment scholar David Kopel’s account of Canada’s draconian gun laws:

… it is virtually impossible for an ordinary citizen to obtain a permit to carry a loaded handgun for self-defense. Handgun carry permits for self-protection are issued “only in exceptional cases” where the issuing officer is “satisfied” of the applicant’s need. A 600 page National Firearms Manual, prepared by the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, provides ample reasons for an officer to accept or deny a self-protection application as he sees fit. In contrast, permits to carry unloaded, locked handguns to target ranges are readily obtainable.
… How strict the police departments are in issuing handgun target licenses varies from region to region. In some jurisdictions, a person might legally buy a handgun, but the police would hold the gun for several months, while the central government in Ottawa completed its paperwork. Only then would the police allow the gun to be taken to a target range.

Notice how law-enforcement are first to champion gun control against the populace, by using the pretext that it’ll stop criminals from arming themselves. This is the case in the US too. Currently, in Washington State, one is treated to TV footage of weepy “vaginas” (not my coinage; I’m innocent here) plumping for a ballot initiative that would, as these simpletons promise, stop violence against women. Explains Rachel Alexander:

I-594 has been cleverly drafted to sound like it merely makes small changes to gun laws, not a flat-out ban or gun registration scheme. This is why it is so dangerous. People are less likely to oppose it; in fact, polls show that even a majority of gun owners – 54 percent of the 35 percent of Washington residents who own a gun – are in favor of it.

The initiative, or so the professional criers claims, is backed by thousands of policemen.

But I digress. Gun restrictions impact the law-abiding citizen; criminals by definition are outlaws. The criminal who “ambushed the Parliament building in Ottawa” had no qualms about violating Canada’s pernicious anti-gun laws to carry out an attack on the Canadian parliament.

Still, the moron media stateside pushes more gun control in … Canada.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

No, we don’t want to be like the UK!

Quite often, in my travels on these here Interwebz, I find gun grabbers pontificating how cool it would be if we were just like Britain. After all, they have stringent gun control, and their homicide rates are SOOOOOO much lower than ours!

Must be the fault of the evil gunz, right?

After all, the United States, according to recent figures, has 4.7 murders per 100,000 residents, while the United Kingdom has 1.

Must be the fault of the evil gunz, right?

Ehhhh… not so fast.

While the United States does, in fact, have a higher murder rate than the UK and much more guns in circulation, anyone with a shred of an education knows that correlation does not equal causation, and that the presence of guns tells a very limited and very inaccurate story.

We have by far one of the highest per capita gun ownership rates in the world, and yet, we’re far from being the most violent country out there.

Countries such as Latvia, that have the same per capita murder rate that we do, have a much lower gun ownership rate.  Whereas we boast 90 firearms per 100 people, and despite this fact, our per capita homicide rates are below those of Estonia and Lithuania, Haiti, the Cayman Islands, and Mexico, which all have gun ownership rates far below ours.

So is it really the guns?

B0JTUOVCcAAK0wg

 

I’m thinking not so much, especially with our homicide, accidental death and violent crime rates on the decline, while gun ownership increases.

homicides-per-year

The UK enacted its strict gun control legislation after the 1996 Dunblane massacre, which resulted in the deaths of 16 children and their teacher. The ban did not stop murders in the UK. As a matter of fact, they increased dramatically in the aftermath of the legislation, and reached their peak in 2003/2004.

That said, the nation has had historically low homicide rates to begin with, so the increase was definitely noticeable.

What also is notable are the low homicide rates prior to the enactment of the gun control legislation, which left most Britons disarmed and vulnerable to armed thugs.

So in a country with historically low homicide rates, one incident prompted a comprehensive infringement on the people’s right to bear arms, and said infringement had no appreciable effect on the already low homicide rates in this country.

Meanwhile in the United States, we finally got rid of the odious and worthless “assault” weapons ban, gun ownership rates have been climbing, and homicide rates have been declining steadily.

But if you think that the Brits are finished spanking the gun owners for incidents of violence for which they are not responsible, you would be wrong.  According the latest news from the UK, if you’re a registered gun owner in Britain, you will be subject to unannounced police visits to your home, and warrantless inspections of firearms storage.

Right to privacy? Forget it.

Right to property? Screw you.

If you are a gun owner in the UK, you have no rights. And yet, we have Mommies Demanding Action for Gunsense screeching about safe storage laws… for the children.

They either don’t understand that such mandates would involve massive violations of Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights, or they don’t care.

My bet is on the latter.

They want more stringent controls. They demand universal background checks that would essentially eliminate private firearms sales, infringing on the people’s right to dispose of their property without government interference.

They want a ban on scary, black rifles for no other reason than they’re black and scary.

And all for what?

For nothing. The UK’s example shows that their gun control laws have had no effect on actual murder rates, but instead of looking at actual causes of violence, the gun grabbers in this country want to be just like the UK.

Do we want to emulate a nation that routinely infringes on its citizens’ right to privacy, right to property, and right to self defense in vain?

I would hope the answer is a resounding “NO!”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

The Ghetto Mentality

Major Jewish communal organizations have a long history of backing Victim Disarmament. We are often our own worst enemies. Aaron Zelman’s forming of JPFO was partially driven as a response to this sad fact. I contend this powerful, self-destructive tendency is part of a larger issue.

About eighteen years ago I was in Mordor on the Potomac. A small group of friends were talking in the hotel when I was asked by one, a very prominent attorney, just why Jews were so often not just politically statist, but rabidly so, especially in the area of Victim Disarmament. At the time, just as now, Jews were among the leaders in this arena.

My theory was that the inclination stemmed from a powerful force; the Ghetto Mentality:

People forget that Hebrew slaves, upon leaving Egypt, were forged by G-d, through Moses, into a powerful guerilla military force. They repeatedly defeated established and skilled armies and conquered the land of Israel. For generations, steeled by their belief, they fought off incursions and carved out their homeland. A Nation of Princes.

Subsequent, progressive, abandonment of the ‘terms’ of the Covenant brought harsh lessons from G’d in the form of civil war, invasion, conquest, the fall of the Holy Temple, and exile to Babylon (and back to Egypt). Lessons learned, the people returned to the Land, only to fail again. Facing a People once again corroded with spiritual debasement, the Romans finished the job. They conquered Israel, sacked Jerusalem, destroyed the Temple, and drove the people into exile.

Jews’ experience in Europe constantly found them pinched between the Church and the Nobility. The nobility required the endorsement of the Church (as the elect of G-d) to lower the cost of retaining power. The Church required the nobility to provide the threat of violence when persuasion and hellfire fell short.

The Church’s vexation with the Jews’ refusal to convert spawned lurid tales of ritual child-murder and “desecration of the host”, just in case deicide was not enough to dehumanize them in the eyes of the people. When the peasants were whipped up into violence in frustration with their lot, the Jew was offered by the Church a natural target.

On the other hand, the nobility tended to like the Jews as they were peaceful, intelligent, hardworking, and kept to themselves. Even better, not constrained by tortured logic on the biblical meaning of Usury, Jews, as a community, were a source of always scarce money, for the constantly broke nobility.

Having few options, when threatened with death at a hands of Church inspired mobs, Jews ran to the nobility for protection. Over time, Jews concluded that working behind the scenes and currying favor with secular power was the only workable survival strategy.

But the time of powerful nobles was coming to an end. So too, the constraints on Jewish access to secular education, to land-ownership, to work in the guilds, and to legal protection by the secular courts were weakening.

Gradually setting aside their fundamental belief in Torah, and longing for Geula, many Jews focused on secular, social action, to satisfy their ingrained drive for Tikkun Olam. After many, many centuries of exile, poverty, suffering, and death, many thought the Enlightenment (and the Jewish variant; the Haskalah) was the correct path. Perhaps, they thought, ‘this’ was the way to bring about the coming of Moshiach?

The first Jewish immigrants to America found that they were once again a minority, but that much (but not all) of the religious antipathy’s vigor had stayed in Europe. Largely of German background, many had been favorably disposed to assimilation via the Reform movement. Intermarriage was very common within two generations. As a guarantee of safety the habit of ingratiating themselves with political power seemed a wise course.

A second wave of Jews came to America in the late 1800’s. These new immigrants had experienced the weakening of the Church and the ascendency of the secular state. They had suffered Pogroms and forced military service. The secular reforms of Western Europe were far slower in coming to the East. Still, they were far more traditionally religious (Today we would call them Orthodox, although that is a better description of congregational affiliation than of people) than those Jews who came in the 1700’s.

This second wave was a profound embarrassment to the established order. Poor, uncultured (in the secular sense), and worst of all, religiously observant, they threatened to remind the Gentile that the first wave immigrants were still Jews. These new (largely Polish, Russian, Baltic, and Slavic) immigrant Jews thus were pressured both from within and without to blend in, and damned fast.

Settling mostly in the large urban centers they naively concluded that American political power was less malignant and dangerous than in the Old World. In a sense they were correct; American politicians were happy to sucker people with little regard to race, creed, color, etc. The Jew responded by the time-proven method of ingratiation.

The aforementioned assimilation was quick in coming. The State became the new focus of worship. Social action in union organizing and Progressive and Socialist politics the new path. For many Jews America was the new Zion, the democratic State was the new Temple, and Social Action was the new Torah. Guns were for gentile hunters, policemen, and soldiers.

The Jewish Poet-Warrior, forged at the foot of Sinai, was all but forgotten. A new day dawned.

And then, a very harsh decree came from the Heavenly Court… An odd little Austrian guy with an amazing gift for oratory started stirring up crowds in beer halls.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

I don’t want to hear “Never again!” ever again

You hear it all the time in writings or speeches about the Holocaust: “Never again!”

This is spoken as a war cry, a cry of defiance and determination. Yet how many of the people raising their figurative fists to the sky and shouting that there will be no more Holocausts are actually doing anything to prevent future disaster?

Damn few. Shouting, “Never again!” doesn’t do one real thing to prevent disaster any more than pink ribbons (which my town is festooned with every October) cure breast cancer. The shouts and the ribbons are both fine if they lead to lifesaving action, but without that, they’re meaningless.

One writer referred to the cancer ribbon campaign as “relentlessly pink optimism”, which can actually be very distressing to women whose cancer has metastasized. “Pink optimism” could lead to greater awareness, but on the other hand it could create false hope, divert research from even deadlier cancers, or end up making people feel less concerned about the problem because their attention eventually blanks out from too much bombardment with those ribbons.

Similarly, “Never again!” creates the impression that something’s being done to prevent Holocausts when there’s little or no action. Since Hitler’s Holocaust, there have been genocides in China, Uganda, Cambodia, Rwanda, and other places known and perhaps others unknown.

The “Never again!” people have done an excellent job of reminding the world of what Hitler did. (My nymsake, Feigele “Vladka” Peltel Meed was one of the earliest to make sure the world wouldn’t forget.) Sadly, though, they’ve also helped create the impression that Hitler was some unique monster and his genocide was the one and only. Yet just as there have been genocides since Hitler, there were also genocides before him. We now know that Stalin probably outdid Hitler when it came to killing his own people and his genocides were well under way when Hitler was barely getting started.

That’s the first big mistake of “Never again!” If you see only one genocide and see it as unique, you’ll always fail to understand the nature of genocide. You’ll look forever at Hitler and Germany, trying to figure out how they were different than everything that came before them and everything after them, which means you’ll fail to understand the full pattern of genocide. You’ll never really understand the attitudes, conditions, and laws that create genocide and you won’t see the next one coming.

One big, vital thing you’ll miss is the role that victim disarmament plays in genocide after genocide. You can’t kill millions of people until you’ve eliminated their ability to fight back. Of course “gun control” is only part of disarming people. It’s part of a package that includes destroying their spirit of resistance, getting them to trust authority even when authority intends to kill them, and other things. Taking away their resistance tools is complicated, but it certainly means keeping the victims less well armed than the perpetrators.

That’s another reason I don’t ever again want to hear “Never again!” Too many of the people shouting those defiant words are working for the very thing that leaves victims unable to defend themselves. How many people who cry, “Never again!” are enthusiastic advocates of “gun control”?

How many of them will tell you that only police and soldiers, the very agents who carry out genocides on behalf of homicidal governments, are the only ones who should have firearms?

No, I don’t want to hear “Never again!” ever again, unless it’s coming from the mouths or the pens of people who really mean it. The way to mean it is to educate people about the wide history of government murder of citizens. Don’t just pretend Hitler was some anomaly. The way to mean it is to stand up for the second amendment, to own firearms, to teach children to shoot and teach them why, to encourage a spirit of resistance, and to understand individual rights and freedom.

Do that and I’ll believe you mean it when you cry, “Never again!”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Faith and Firearms Revisited

Years ago – when I had time to write more than an occasional blog post, I wrote an article on faith and firearms for the U.S. Concealed Carry Association.

Having grown up Jewish, I always wondered why it is that major Jewish organizations were always pushing disarmament, and worse yet, leaning on faith to do it!

For an answer in this article, I turned to Rabbi Isaac Leizerowski – a friend of my dad’s and an authority on Jewish law. Rabbi Leizerowski confirmed that the right to self defense is actually mandated by Jewish law.

From the sanctity of Life comes an imperative to safeguard Life. The directive to defend your life is written in the Talmud, the 70-volume Code of Jewish Law, in at least three places. “And the Torah says, ‘If someone comes to kill you, arise quickly and kill him.’”

For a reply on the psychology of disarmament, I turned to another friend, who shed some light on the issue.

Jack Feldman, Professor of Psychology at Georgia Institute of Technology, has one theory: “Jews are called on to care for others who are troubled, suffering, etc. and to stand up for the oppressed,” he says. “It’s a mitzvah. Democrats and socialists (traditional proponents of gun control) have taken that role, in appearance if not reality…A lot of us have yet to get the message about the Left, and [continue to] cling to these fallacies.”

Life is sacred, my friends. We must work to change the mindset that disarmament somehow promotes safety, and is therefore a mitzvah.

It’s not.

Disarmament is death. It’s slavery. It’s tyranny. It’s the antithesis of everything Jews strive to achieve in the social sphere – life, liberty, goodness.

The Nazis knew this, and we should never forget this.

And we must strive to show it for what it is and challenge its proponents – especially in organized Jewish circles!

Because if we allow gun grabbers to control the message and spread the lie that gun control is somehow beneficial, we’ll be swimming upstream for a long time.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Dreidels & Hedgerows

Imagine you lived in a country where the ability to worship G-d was being outlawed, where your language and culture was disappearing. Where Preachers were jailed or killed for preaching the Bible or Tanakh? You think I’m talking about America, now? Maybe. Because football players are made to remove Crosses from their helmets, because for a time the Navy was told to remove the little Gideon Bibles from the rooms of their guest lodges? Because courts rule a Cross or the 10 commandments can’t be displayed? Maybe. But it’s not the first time in history. Let’s take a little trip back to Ireland.

In Ireland in the late 1600-till the later part of the 1700 there were a set of laws called “The Penal Laws”. The final bits were repealed in 1920. They affected Catholics and other dissidents. They entailed things like:

  • Exclusion of Catholics from most public offices (since 1607), Presbyterians were also barred from public office from 1707.
  • Ban on intermarriage with Protestants.
  • Presbyterian marriages were not legally recognized by the state
  • Catholics barred from owing firearms or serving in the armed forces.
  • Prohibition on Catholics owning a horse valued at over £5
  • ‘No person of the Catholic religion shall publicly or in private houses teach school, or instruct youth in learning within this realm’ upon pain of twenty pounds fine and three months in prison for every such offense.

And this is only part of them. But here’s a couple questions for you to mull over. WHY did they want to prohibit the Catholics from owning weapons? Who got to determine what the horse was worth?

The harsh rules gave rise to the hedgerow schools. Parents who were determined to save their children from being indoctrinated with beliefs other than what they held, and what they wanted their children to learn began to form and utilize “Hedgerow Schools”. This was forbidden because England wanted all the children to be taught the way they wanted them to be taught and what they wanted them to be taught. The Hedgerow Schools thrived. They were sometimes held in barns, homes but often in Hedgerows, with one child acting as a lookout. And they needed a lookout. If they were caught there were fines and imprisonment for all. There was a lot to lose. But the parents wanted their children to learn, the teachers wanted to teach and would travel around conducting these early forms of “home schooling” in defiance of the state mandated education.

Their language, culture and faith were under attack, and this is what they had to do to preserve it. They did it.

Now let’s go even further back in time. Achshav Annachnu b’Ysrael. NOW we are in Israel.

Let’s go back to the time of Antiochus, he liked to be called Epiphanes, although the Jews often called him Epimanes, the mad one. While Antiochus reigned Jews were forbidden to practice their religion, own a Torah, let alone read it, or observe festivals,or even the Sabbath. The people could not even admit they were Jewish. 40,000 were killed and 40,000 sold into slavery when Jerusalem was sacked and the temple was defiled. Animals that were forbidden to Jews were sacrificed on it’s alter. Now, during this time there were observant Jews and Hellanized Jews. Meaning Jews that were fine with what Antiochus was doing. Mainly urban upper crust, they wanted to dispense with Jewish law and adopt the Greek lifestyle. As I understand it for political and economic reasons.

And into this hot mess comes The Maccabees. I adore the Maccabees! It all started when Jews were ordered to offer sacrifices to Greek idols. A rural Jew know as Mattathias Maccabee refused. Not only did he refuse, but he killed the Hellenized Jew that stepped forward to offer a sacrifice to the idol in his name. Mattathias REFUSED to allow his name to be put on the offer of a sacrifice to an idol. From there the Maccabees took flight to the Judean wilderness. After Mattathias’ death about one year later in 166 BC, his son Judah Maccabee led an army of Jewish dissidents to victory over the Seleucid dynasty in guerrilla warfare, which at first was directed against Hellenizing Jews, of whom there were many. Judah Maccabee is noted as one of the greatest warriors in Jewish History, alongside David, Gideon and Joshua! So that’s how the Maccabean Revolt began. The Maccabees retook the city of Jerusalem. Judah ordered the Temple to be cleansed, a new altar to be built in place of the polluted one and new holy vessels to be made. According to the Talmud, unadulterated and undefiled pure olive oil with the seal of the Kohen Gadol (high priest) was needed for the menorah in the Temple, which was required to burn throughout the night every night. The story goes that one flask was found with only enough oil to burn for one day, yet it burned for eight days, the time needed to prepare a fresh supply of kosher oil for the menorah. A great miracle, nachon (right)?

Which brings us to this, a Dreidel/Savivon. Remember the Hedgerow Schools of Ireland? Well, while Jews were forbidden to study their Bible/Tanakh, forbidden to pass their faith onto their children they would go up into caves and hide. They would begin to teach the children, and they themselves would study. When they heard the Greek soldiers approaching they would put their Torah away and whip out the Savivon/Dreidel and begin to play. It could be a childrens game, or a gambling game. So it would appear to to the soldiers they were merely hiding and gambling. This is what they had to do to hold on to their faith, to pass it on to their children. To retain their culture and customs, they were willing to hide in caves, risk being caught by the soldiers and pay the penalty, death. Like the Irish, they found a way, and they did it.

If you look at what lengths the Irish and Jews went to back then to ensure the survival of their culture and religion it seems pretty sad now that some voices can be shut down by screeches of “racism” or “intolerance” or “hater”, simply for wanting to discuss an issue, preach from the Bible or Tanakh doesn’t it?

We are losing our culture so fast. When I was young, you saw rifles in racks in pick-up trucks everywhere. No one really thought anything of kids getting a .22 rifle. My Grandpa taught my cousin and me how to shoot his. My sisters and I all knew where Dad kept his revolver and shotgun. We KNEW if someone tried to break in and harm us either he or my Mom would do whatever needed to be done to keep the children they brought into this world safe. We knew not to mess with them when we put the clean clothes away, and we didn’t. It baffles me that I am more willing to protect my pet chickens (my little feather darlings) than some people are their flesh and blood children. I look at it as I bought the chickens, I’m responsible for them. I have no idea how they look at it, but I suspect they have bought into the culture shift of “no one is safe with a gun around”. If you get in trouble you just call the Police. Then they will come with guns and if you’re still alive, they’ll help you with their guns. Following their logic, I hope they forgo a smoke detector or fire extinguisher. After all, they can call the Fire Department and wait for them to come.

If you don’t think Hollywood has had an effect on this country, watch the following clip!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evSC-WZFw1c

Can you imagine Gwynth Paltrow or Ben Affleck singing something like this? NO! Ben Affleck still thinks ISIS is peaceful and no threat. Obviously, I see very few movies as I have no desire to put money in the pockets of people someone like Paltrow who thinks Mr. Obama should be given all the power he wants.

Now if a child’s picture is posted on Facebook proudly posing with a new gun it may merit a visit from the Police. Gnaw your pop tart into what a teacher decides is a gun shape and you would think the world was ending. Now we aren’t just talking about consequences of real crime, but consequences of “thought crime”.

This is an actual ad from 1961.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMoLdjFWd2s

Can you imagine such a toy being advertised today? I had a hard time finding a cap pistol when I wanted to start getting my horse used to gunfire.

For those of us raised in a culture of freedom, responsibility, and self-defense, the changes we see are not only disgusting, but alarming. Think about what you can do, to preserve the culture. To recognize the threats, and push back. I used to work gun shows with a man who gave out pocket copies of “The Citizens Rule Book”. It had the Bill of Rights, a Jury Handbook and The Constitution. On the back is a warning, “This Document May Be Hazardous To Bad Laws.” and II Chronicles 7:14.

If My people which are called by My name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways; then I will hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin and will heal their land”.

I personally carry a Dreidel/Savivon in my purse. All the time. It reminds me to be vigilant and committed to doing everything I can to ensure freedom.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail