21 Jan
The Arizona Shooting-A Jewish Perspective (Part 2)
Talmudic wisdom urges us to be circumspect with our behavior as a community when a tragedy strikes home. Because of our collective and corporate sense of identity, we are all responsible for the moral condition of our communities. This idea can be seen in one of the more peculiar precepts found in the Torah known as the eglei aruphah. The precept derives from Deuteronomy 21:1-9, which centers on the discovery of a corpse near a community.
“If the corpse of a slain man is found lying in the open on the land which the LORD, your God, is giving you to occupy, and it is not known who killed him, your elders and judges shall go out and measure the distances to the cities that are in the neighborhood of the corpse.”
Explanation: The court must ascertain the cause of death; was there foul-play? What kind of crime occurred, and why? Was the man accidentally killed by a wild-beast? In any event, the death of the innocent person demands justice. There must be an atonement sacrifice to purify the earth of the blood that cries out for justice (see Genesis 4:10). At the end of the ritual, the court declares: “‘Our hands did not shed this blood, and our eyes did not see the deed; forgive O LORD, your people Israel, whom you have ransomed, and let not the guilt of shedding innocent blood remain in the midst of your people Israel.’ Thus they shall be absolved from the guilt of bloodshed . . .” (Deut. 21:7-9).
Talmudic discussions on this chapter raise an important forensic question on the text: Would it occur to anybody to suspect that the elders would be responsible for such a crime? Who could be more honorable than the judges?
The Sages point out that in biblical and as well as in rabbinic times, it was considered unsafe to let a guest leave a host’s home without being escorted for at least part of that person’s journey. The judges of a community are to some degree indirectly accountable for allowing a murder to occur on their watch, “The victim did not come to us hungry and we sent him away without any food. He did not come to us alone and we offered him no protection.”
When we look at the terrible tragedy that took place in Arizona-as a community-we need to ask ourselves whether our hands are really “clean” or not. The more I read about the story that led to this incident, the more painfully obvious it is that our leaders have abdicated their responsibility once again.
Sometime during the Clinton Administration (and please bear in mind, I really like Clinton), Attorney General Janet Reno enacted a policy that restricted the military from reporting certain drug abusers to the FBI, which has long maintained a national list of prohibited gun-buyers since 1994.
This seemingly well-meaning decision paved the way for accused Arizona gunman Jared Loughner to buy his first firearm-despite the fact that he failed a drug-screening test when he attempted to join the military back in 2008. So, as it turned out, Loughner went and purchased the gun from a local Sportsman’s Wearhouse-no questions asked.
What was Reno’s motivation? Why would she propose a law that would help a known drug-user obtain a gun that ordinarily he would never have been able to get-even by the standards of an old 1994 statute? Well, Janet Reno really felt sorry for the poor drug-addict; perhaps if the federal agencies disallowed men like Loughner to obtain a gun, he might not ever take the necessary steps to seek treatment.
Every choice and deed has consequences. A better screening process is necessary-one which will close the legal loophole that allowed Loughner to obtain his weapon of choice. Psychological testing is necessary for all wishing to obtain a gun, just like we insist upon psychological testing for anyone working in a government or public building. It’s common sense. Perhaps if we worried more about the rights of law-abiding people more than the rights of drug-users and other criminals, we could avoid more tragedies like the one we saw this past week in Arizona.
No, our hands are not clean-nor will they be until we start changing the foolish laws that presently exist on our books and start restricting the access mentally impaired people from purchasing firearms.
Respond to this post