Previous post
Next post
A slew of anti-Semitic attacks in New York in the past several days stress the need for Jewish people to alter their attitudes about armed self-defense, but why are so many of them doubling down?
The latest attack took place just last night when a machete-wielding goblin stabbed five Hasidic Jews during a Chanukah celebration. The attack is just the latest in a string of anti-Semitic acts of violence that have taken place in New York/New Jersey region recently – at least 13 at last count. But if you think that some white supremacist neo-Nazi type perpetrated this latest attack, think again.
The suspect, who authorities identified as 38-year-old Grafton Thomas, sped away in a gray 2015 Nissan Sentra, which was later located in Harlem, police said.
Grafton Thomas is hardly the white supremacist the left wants to identify with the Trump administration. This particular anti-Semitic fuck doesn’t fit the left’s stereotype, and therefore will be ignored in favor of calls for more gun control and more laws that will impact no one but the law abiding.
Thomas has a criminal history, including an incident in which he punched a police horse, according to the Daily Beast, and while New York Governor Andy “I’m in it because my whole family is a corrupt bunch of leftist assholes” Cuomo, calls the attack “inexplicable” and an act of “domestic terrorism,” as Toni explained in her post, he’s all in for the state’s new “bail reform” that doesn’t technically go into effect until the new year, but has already seen violent, criminal scum released on no-cash bail to await trial at home (or wherever they choose to commit more violent crimes).
“And if you go to court, you’ll hear that the judges are very anguished about this,” said Special Narcotics Prosecutor Bridget Brennan. “They’re very concerned the defendants not only will not return to court—but that the defendants pose a public safety risk.”
Many of the crimes are misdemeanors or non-violent felonies, but the law also includes some homicide charges like manslaughter in the 2nd degree.
Cuomo said the law was designed to make the criminal justice system more equitable for the people who don’t have easy access to cash.
Social justice is apparently more important than actual public safety.
So in light of a drastic increase in anti-Semitic violence in the region, and the fact that Cuomo signed a “reform” that will let thousands of violent pieces of garbage out on the streets to terrorize the citizens, why is it that some Jews are still not only in the bag for the social justice lunacy that is putting their lives in danger, but are also refusing to see that armed self-defense can help save Jewish lives?
On Twitter – the cancer of the Internet – some brain-dead creature that claims it’s a writer is arguing that is never the solution.
“You want a society traumatized by gun violence, just peep the replies here,” she continues.
THE STOOPID! IT BUUUUURNS!
How else does one stop a machete-wielding villain from chopping up one’s loved ones? Kind words?
Jewish people in the United States have a longstanding aversion to firearms ownership. It’s a ridiculous one, to be sure, since the Torah actually commands Jews to defend their lives with lethal force, if need be. Given Jewish history and the continued anti-Semitic abuses of the Jewish people, it’s hard to believe that so many Jews think that doing nothing and remaining passive victims is the way to stop anti-Semitic attacks.
On the pro-gun side is the famous Talmudic dictum: If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first. This statement from the Talmudic sage Rava is derived from a passage that permits a homeowner to kill an intruder in self-defense if the trespasser arrives in the night.
The Torah commands self-preservation, and Jews who stubbornly refuse to see it while preaching gun control, and claiming that Judaism’s prohibition on putting oneself in unnecessary danger proscribes gun ownership, are blinded by stupidity. How is sitting in one’s own home, celebrating the High Holy Days unnecessarily dangerous – even more so than owning a firearm for self defense?
So why is it that Jews like this David Klion, who is ostensibly Jewish, but thinks that protecting Jews from anti-Semitic violence should take a backseat to social justice virtue signaling about police abuses about “people of color,” absolutely refuse to see the value of armed self-defense to protect Jewish people from anti-Semitic attacks?
“…real costs, potentially even fatal ones, for tens of thousands of people who have no complicity in these attacks.”
OK, asshole. Now do gun owners.
No?
You don’t care about depriving hundreds of thousands of innocent American citizens of their fundamental rights – people who have no complicity in any shootings? Why not?
Rabbi Dovid Bendory has several hypotheses why so many Jewish people refuse to take up arms in their own defense – even when anti-Semitic attacks are on the rise.
1. A desire for utopian moral purity
2. A disproportional incidence of hoplophobia
3. A quest for power through victimization of peers
4. A utopian delusion that if guns would just “go away,”
crime would end and the world would be a peaceful safe place
5. Self hatred and a wish to be helpless, acting out guilt-based
behavioral problems that develop in childhood
6. The Ostrich Syndrome
7. Garden-variety hypocrisy
8. Adulterated religion — Jews In Name Only (JINOs)
9. Feel-good sophistry
10. Abject fear that yields irrational behavior
Bendory also notes that in every Jewish community, there are sheepdogs albeit closeted and concealed – the Shomrim, who “stand as silent and unobserved guardians of their Jewish brethren, without acknowledgment.”
Unfortunately, it seems there are not enough of these dedicated armed guardians, who could have prevented the murderous terrorist attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue last year, or at the very least may have reduced the body count, as congregants were forced to wait nine minutes for the police to arrive. Eleven innocent people were murdered in those nine minutes; how many could have been saved with an immediate armed response from one of the Shomrim?
The police in Halle, Germany certainly did not respond in time on Yom Kippur attack as Stephan Balliet murdered innocent people in an anti-Semitic rampage in October. Germany’s strict gun control probably prevented any Shomrim from acting to save innocent people under attack, and the German Interior Minister announced that security in synagogues across the country would be permanently increased to prevent future attacks.
And although the sentiment is appreciated, I’m sure, the government of Germany is simply perpetuating the myth that police will always be there to protect you and increasing reliance on “the authorities” to save you when shit hits the fan.
Sorry, but no. Anti-Semitic attacks highlight the need for Jews to stop relying on government agents to protect them and start taking some personal responsibility for their own safety.
One can only hope that more Shomrim begin appearing in America’s Jewish communities to put some teeth in the words “NEVER AGAIN!” and take it back from the mealy-mouthed, lying gun-grabbers who have co-opted the oath to never allow the genocide of the Holocaust for their political agenda – an agenda that will do exactly that by disarming millions of innocent people.
BREAKING NEWS: Armed defender stops attack on Texas church.
WFAA-TV (Channel 8) reported that the church shooting was captured on a live stream of Sunday’s worship service. In the video, which has since been taken down, a person stands and pulls out a weapon, then appears to fire twice before another person shoots back, according to WFAA.
Some congregants holding guns rushed toward the shooter, while others ducked under church pews, WFAA reported.
These are defenders in action. Jewish people and the dildos on Twitter and in the New York legislature would be wise to learn their lessons from them.
Welcome, Instapundit readers!
Featured photo: Edwin.11 on Flickr; CC 2.0; cropped, resized
Scott says: Looks like a likely adherent to the religion of pieces….
And Cuomo is a freaking idiot, with at best, a room temp IQ
Marta Hernandez says: I seriously have to wonder how Cuomo breathes and chews gum at the same time. Dude is seriously dumber than a box of hammers, and much less useful.
GWB says: You stop talking about us like that! It’s insulting to be compared to him!
/hammers
Marta Hernandez says: My abject apologies to the hammers. It was merely hyperbole.
Anna A says: Thank you for mentioning the Texas church shooting. I would have done it, if you had not. Shows the difference when people are armed and know how to shoot vs being in a gun free environment.
Marta Hernandez says: Absolutely. I saw that story break shortly after I published the piece. It made my point perfectly.
Phoenix says: The last update I read claimed that at least SIX different people drew on the shooter, although only two pulled the trigger. I live in Texas, and every church I have attended in the last 15 years has had armed security present. Usually they are guys I know personally, generally former military.
Marta Hernandez says: Video showed a few, but I didn’t count. It could have very well been.
SDN says: Which neatly torpedoes the gun-grabber myth that “if everyone is carrying we’ll have people shooting wildly!!!!eleventy!!!”
No, for that you have to go to the NYPD…..
“All nine people wounded in an incident when a man gunned down an aquaintance outside the Empire State Building and then was killed by cops were hit by police gunfire, New York Police Department Commissioner Raymond Kelly confirmed today.”
GWB says: And that’s one example of MANY. (One of my “favorites” is the cops in CA who fired over 100 rounds at a little blue truck, and managed to hit the rear window of the cab with about 3, and not a single round hit either woman in the truck (who were both innocent).)
But only cops are well-trained enough to handle guns.
370H55V says: “Jewish people in the United States have a longstanding aversion to firearms ownership.”
This one doesn’t–and neither do these guys:
Marta Hernandez says: Yes, I know. Rabbi Bendory, whom I quoted in the piece, is JPFO’s Rabbi.
To explain Jewish reluctance to own guns, recall that most of American gun culture is centred around hunting, not self-defense. And because the kosher laws require specific methods of slaughter, hunting for food is not part of Jewish culture, and hunting purely for sport doubly so.
But as the conversation in the US moves from hunting to self-defense, and as the need for self-defense (and not relying on the police) becomes more evident, I have seen the conversation within the Jewish community shift quite rapidly.
GWB says: Just to be clear, gun culture in America has evolved to be mostly for hunting. And that attitude has gradually moved across the country, as parts became less “dangerous” during our history – from the Eastern cities, to the Midwest, to the West. Also, as police became more omnipresent (maybe “ubiquitous” would be a better term) the “we don’t need a gun” feeling increases.
I think the Jewish presence in America has, to some extent, corresponded to that movement. So, concur on the reasoning.
Marta Hernandez says: And very few Jews live in rural areas where that’s even a thing, right?
GWB says: I think it’s legitimate to say that there are fewer Jewish communities of size in rural areas. And those clusters “define” Jews in many ways in America – much like blue areas can control a state that is mostly red.
GWB says: a machete-wielding goblin stabbed five
OK, a nitpick. And it’s not you, Marta, because I saw this in the original articles, and I think even the police statement.
But: “stabbing” with a machete is really hard. It’s a slashing weapon. It’s possible they were stabbed, but that just isn’t how you attack with a machete.
Maybe it’s because I have some training in fighting with blades, but I suspect it (to me) is the same sort of imprecision that gives us “30-round clip” and “automatic” fire from semi-automatic weapons in the media – and even from our law enforcement.
sped away in a
I know it was a small gathering, and those who were not stabbed were probably in shock. But how does a guy get in close and personal (you have to, with a blade) in a home with multiple people in it, and he actually gets away apparently unscathed? You have to disarm the people AND disarm their minds for that to occur.
Thomas has a criminal history
Sooooo… the gun control laws worked this time? yay
designed to make the criminal justice system more equitable for the people who don’t have easy access to cash
The better way to do that is to not allow bail for anyone. And to hold trials immediately.
No, I know that doesn’t work either, but it’s less stupid than Cuomo’s way.
also refusing to see that armed self-defense can help
Because progressivism is a religion. A cult. And they’ve been indoctrinated into it since they were wee ones in elementary school.
How else does one stop a machete-wielding villain from chopping up one’s loved ones?
Well, they could have all been wearing swords. Something in the broadsword-to-longsword range would have kept them adequately out of his reach while allowing them to prick him lightly in a gentlemanly fashion until he was discouraged enough to go see his counselor.
the Torah actually commands Jews to defend their lives with lethal force, if need be
Talmudic dictum
There’s a difference here. Talmud is Rabbinic interpretation. Torah is the actual Biblical Law. Torah permits it. This Talmudic bit seems to require it.
Jews like this David Klion
Well, you know the alternative to “flooding the area with cops”?
Have good, regular citizens obtain firearms in some number, learn to use them effectively, and carry them regularly. Then you can do those citizen-y things and won’t need cops to “flood” anything.
A desire for utopian moral purity
He nailed it for almost all of them with number 1.
if guns would just “go away,” crime would end
Yep, because they won’t accept Original Sin, and can therefore be easily deluded into thinking people will be good if you just take away the tools of evil.
Mind you, so very many of those things in Rabbi Bendory’s list don’t just apply to Jews. They apply to a great multitude of those who have been brainwashed by progressivism.
perpetuating the myth
Yep. Preach it, sister.
BTW, relying on the gov’t to protect you also puts you in a situation where no one else will if the gov’t ever turns on you. But, that would never happen, right? No gov’t would ever just allow the locals to commit pogroms against their Jewish neighbors, right?
start taking some personal responsibility for their own safety
Now, as a religious man, I will say that if they want to leave their protection directly in God’s own hands, then more power to ’em. (Literally.) But to deny God’s ability to protect them by shunning His own hands and feet (to use an Evangelical phrase for God working through his people) and preventing them from doing His work is stupid. (Isaiah 7:10-14)
while others ducked under church pews
While some fear may have played into this, this is also called “good tactics”. If you’re not the one with the gun, get out of the line of fire. (You’re trained this way on Navy ships – if the Marines yell “get down!” it means they want you out of the way of the lead. And you waste no time getting down.)
Excellent, Marta.
Marta Hernandez says: I’ve owned a machete, although I’ve never used it against a human. It would be hard to stab someone with it. I wonder if the guy was on something… ketamine, meth… whatever, and tried to do it that way?
GWB says: It would explain why he didn’t manage to kill anyone. It would also almost require you to be on drugs to want to stab someone instead slashing/chopping – ’cause it just feels slashy in the hand.
GWB says: BTW, I haven’t attacked any humans with a machete, either.
I have killed a rabbit with one (actually, a large bolo blade), using the back side of the blade to break its neck. (It was survival school, and we then cleaned, cooked and ate the rabbit in a nice stew.)
My guess? Just like every handgun is a Glock to the press, and every rifle an Assault-Rifle 15, whatever this thug actually used has just been renamed “machete”.
Marta Hernandez says: Possible. Very, very possible! (bows to Bernadette Peters)
But how does a guy get in close and personal (you have to, with a blade) in a home with multiple people in it, and he actually gets away apparently unscathed?
The folks at the gathering chased him off by throwing tables at him; after that, they were probably occupied with helping the stabbing victims.
the Torah actually commands Jews to defend their lives with lethal force, if need be […] Talmudic dictum
There’s a difference here. Talmud is Rabbinic interpretation. Torah is the actual Biblical Law.
Nah, Marta got it right. At least colloquially in the orthodox Jewish community, “The written Torah, as explicated by the Talmud, says…” is usually simplified to “The Torah says…”.
GWB says: BTW, the Guardian Angels are back.
Of course, they’re unarmed, so……..
And, Tony Katz has, over on 93.1 WIBC has a bit on “Guns That Will Fit In Your Tallit Bag” with recommendations.
GWB says: Let me state for the record: I am not against them being unarmed, as they are at least getting out and trying to be actual citizens taking care of their communities. Not everyone has to be armed.
But, they might find it difficult to pull off a citizen’s arrest on a meth-head swinging a machete without getting hurt, themselves.
John in Indy says: Raised in a liberal Cal Teachers Assoc home, then moved to S Louisiana in the early 70s for work. Faced there with the official police expectation that I would deal with criminal problems while they wre on the way, For myself, I had to determine from first principles whether it was appropriate for me to use deadly force in self defense.
My analysis was 1) that like it ir not, I was a member of Civilization.
2) That if I did nothing with my life except support myself through employment, and commit no crimes, that my existence was a net positive for Civilization.
3) That a criminal, willing to use violence against members of Civilization for personal benefit, is a net negative to Civilization.
4) That it is therefore a befefit to Civilization that I preserve my life, even if that means the death of an attacker.
5) That self-defense in the face of an attack is therefore not only my right, but my duty.
6) That I should therefore prepare to meet that duty, if called upon to do so, by arming myself with an appropriate weapon, and becoming sufficiently skilled in its’ use.
7) That the use of deadly force, when necessary, in defense of other members of Civilization is also a benefit to Civilization, and approaches being a duty.
This analysis was sufficient as a principle for me to luve by, and appears to me to be both ethical and reasonable.
Most American law distinguishes perception of danger differently in self-defense and defense of others cases. In self-defence, the focus is on whether a reasonable person in such a circumstance would believe that their life or bodily integrity was in danger.
In defense of others, most law requires that the belief of the person acting be correct, that is, if you act against someone in the belief that they were attacking someone, that belief must be correct. This distinction is why, in my mind, defense of others is a qualified duty, rather than an absolute one.
Thanks for the work you do here at the blog, and in the rest of the world.
John in Indy
&media=https://victorygirlsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/never-again.jpg){kind=link}
26 Comments