Man’s Law Kills Again – The Sin of Gun Free Zones

Man's Law Kills Again – The Sin of Gun Free Zones
Commentary by Rabbi Dovid Bendory, The “Gun Rabbi”.

Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership
Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership

Hartford, WI – -( If only we had followed the Ten Commandments, the massacre at Fort Hood would not have happened. Tautological, no?

Oh, I didn't mean that Ten Commandments. I meant “The Ten Commandments of Self-Defense.”

Commandment #1: “G-d has given you the right of self-defense, even with deadly force, when warranted.”

The murdered US soldiers, those who voluntarily trained to stand in the line of fire against our enemies in order to keep us safe, they were denied the right to defend themselves. Why? Because the US government — that same government that they are sworn to defend — took away their G-d-given rights. Gun Free Zones

Army Regulation 190-14, promulgated under Commander in Chief William Jefferson Clinton on March 12, 1993, “Limits and controls the carrying of firearms by Department of the Army military and civilian personnel (para 2-6).”

Yes, that's right — soldiers of the United States, those in whom we entrust our safety and security, are not trusted by the Commander in Chief to carry arms: “Due to the serious responsibility imposed on persons authorized to bear or use firearms, such persons must be selected with care.” (2-2a)

Apparently selecting a soldier for active duty is not considered sufficient care. Oh, you can risk your life for our country. You're old enough to die for our country. You can bear arms when we send you into battle — but not on base. Best be advised before you enlist: “It is DoD Policy… [t]o limit and control the carrying of firearms by DoD military and civilian personnel.” (Appendix B, DoD Directive 5210.56, Policy D.1.)

What does The Gun Rabbi say?
G-d has given us not only the right but the obligation to defend ourselves and others from aggression. G-d's Law says that both soldier and a civilian have the right to keep and bear arms. Our Founders understood G-d's Law and enshrined it in the Second Amendment along with other such inalienable rights.

But we live in a world today where some put themselves above even G-d's Law. And so we have this “Man's Law” which limits and controls the carrying of firearms by DoD military and civilian personnel.

How many soldiers would be alive or uninjured if the targets of our treasonous Mujahid had been “allowed” to protect themselves with force of arms? How many more victims of Man's “Gun Control” do we need to count before our Commander in Chief recognizes G-d's Law?

G-d says I can defend myself. We must all choose: G-d's Law? Or Man's?

Rabbi Dovid Bendory

The Gun Rabbi offers you a unique combination of Jewish Law and firearms training. A Certified NRA Instructor, the Gun Rabbi offers practical instruction in pistol safety and shooting accompanied by the religious and ethical insights on self defense that only an Orthodox Rabbi can provide.

Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership Mission is to destroy “gun control” and to encourage Americans to understand and defend all of the Bill of Rights for everyone. Those are the twin goals of Wisconsin-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO). Founded by Jews and initially aimed at educating the Jewish community about the historical evils that Jews have suffered when they have been disarmed, JPFO has always welcomed persons of all religious beliefs who share a common goal of opposing and reversing victim disarmament policies while advancing liberty for all.

  • 6 thoughts on “Man’s Law Kills Again – The Sin of Gun Free Zones

    1. Somehow, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership overlooked Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Lautenberg, Schakowsky, Nadler, Emmanuel and Bloomberg, when it came to “educating Jews about firearms ownership”.

      How TF did that happen? These Jews need an epiphany on the Second Amendment more than anyone.

    2. For this and other Army-post discussions, let us accept as a hypothetical a tenet of the anti-gun Left. Our “hypothetical” label protects us from an allegation that we agree with the Left on that proposition. Their insistence is that the Second Amendment is incumbent only on the Federal government and not on the States.

      If that view were valid the States would have full freedom of oppression of gun owners. We “gun nuts,” though, are able to tell the Feds to go pound sand when they get all juiced up for a bit of infringement. So our hypothetical acceptance of the Left-handed view means the States are in no way involved in the matter.

      We now have the Federal government–constitutionally prohibited to do so–declaring that citizens must vacate a constitutionally protected right when they enter property controlled by the Feds. That is the case with Ft. Hood and any other military base.

      How hard would it be for an ably represented affected soldier to win the verdict if he posed a legal challenge to the infringement? The fact is that a judge hearing his case in any Federal District court ought to be subject to discipline if he allowed anyone’s time to be spent on substantive argument. The judge would be obliged by any oath judges swear to enter a summary judgment suppressing the Army’s order.

      I would love it if some troop who has an unblemished record over many re-enlistments and combat tours simply to walk on base (very likely to be stopped at the main gate) with a holstered 1911 strapped to his waist (or even one of those prissy Beretta 9s). We Good Guys could then en masse ask Counseler Gura of Heller vs. District of Columbia fame–as well as many other encounters–to take a half hour off from McDonald vs. City of Chicago and wipe up a Federal courtroom with whoever dared represent the Army. Just a thought, but a bit of fantasy never hurt anyone.

    Leave a Comment 6 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *