Last Wednesday, one day after a horrific terror attack in Jerusalem that left four rabbis and a Druze police officer dead, a Facebook post caught my attention. It was a photo featuring the typical accoutrements of a weekday prayer service – tfillin cases, a prayer book – alongside a holstered handgun. “This is how my friend is praying in Israel,” the status line read.
A day later, Israeli Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch announced new guidelines for gun-licensing in Jerusalem, making good on a vow in the wake of the Nov. 18 attack to ease restrictions on firearm ownership in the beleaguered city. Jerusalem now joins a list of areas in Israel where residents may have an easier time obtaining gun permits.
The new rules aren’t restricted to Jerusalem, either. Under the updated guidelines, gun permits will be made available to reserve officers, shooting teachers and those who served in some elite IDF combat units. In addition, security companies can allow guards to take their firearms home at the end of a shift (that privilege was revoked in 2013, in response to a rash of murders across Israel).
Even with the easing of some restrictions, Israel’s gun laws remain tough, and gun ownership per capita is in the single digits (by contrast, Canada clocks in at 30-plus guns per 100 residents, while the United States leads the world with 90 guns for every 100 residents). All things considered, gun ownership is still fairly difficult to obtain in Israel. And yet Aharonovitch made no secret that the relaxation of gun laws was tied to the Har Nof shul tragedy and other recent terror attacks in Jerusalem and beyond. “The decision to ease the restriction stems from recent events and the need to strengthen the sense of security,” he said after approving the new rules.
In the wake of the synagogue murders, it’s hard not to wonder whether the two Palestinian terrorists wielding a gun, knives and a meat cleaver would have caused so much damage if even one person inside that shul had been armed. Perhaps a trained, responsible shooter would have been able to minimize the damage, or prevent the carnage entirely. But arming civilians does not come without risks: chilling accounts of gun-related violence in the United States warn of the dangers associated with making weapons more easily accessible.
The horrific images of a blood-splattered house of worship are impossible to ignore, and they call for a response that emphasizes the security of Israelis – when they’re waiting for the next light-rail train or reciting morning prayers in the local shul. Whether the latest wave of violence and bloodshed across Israel signals the dawning of a new intifadah, the emergence of “lone-wolf” acts as a new mode of Palestinian terrorism or something else entirely, Israelis deserve to feel safe in their country. Increasing the number of armed civilians might just help.
But the image of the gun juxtaposed with the prayer book also symbolizes the fear of a nation on edge, bracing for the next terror attempt. It is a painful reminder that Israel is under attack. Brandishing a weapon at a place of prayer is a tragedy, too. — YONI