More CCW in Israel

Status
Not open for further replies.
THis change in Israelie policy might just be the first step, especially if the violence continues to escalate with more and more attacks upon Israelie civilians by Palestinian terrorists/criminals. Israel has previously tried to improve security for its citizens by widely using security officers at both governmental and private locations. The cost of this system is seenubgkt enormous, with typical restaurants and other public establishments employing armed security. Only because it is so prevalent has it not apparently caused competitive challenges to many businesses that employ such measures.

The U.S. has never taken this route, preferring to rely upon formal police forces as well as, in much of the country, allowing individual citizens to assume some responsibility for their own physical defense and well being. I wonder if the anti-gunners who keep saying that guns should only be in the hands of the police and other trained security individuals would really be happy to see civilian security guards with automatic or semi-automatic long guns standing in front of virtually every business location. And as Israel has found, even this huge security infrastructure has proved inadequate to stop individual violent terrorist attacks.

While I do not wish ill in any way upon the population of Israel, it might prove interesting if the violence escalates, Israel starts allowing widespread if not universal arming of its citizens, when would then see a marked decrease in the success of the terrorist attempts. Then some in the U.S. might say that having large numbers of concealed and open carriers is not such a bad thing, after all. Of course, the anti-gun crowd might just say "Its different here, we are not facing widespread terrorism" and bitterly cling to their faith-without-facts support of gun control.
 
Israel is relaxing the restrictions it currently has. If the U.S. followed that thinking, and relaxed our gun-control restrictions as a rational response to an increase in threat, then yes that is a policy I would advocate we follow.

And the way this Israeli police spokesman dealt with media protests might be worth studying, the reported had to ask the same question 5 different ways, and still did not hear what he wanted to.

this is a link to the interview: http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...nn/video/playlists/situation-room-highlights/
 
Last edited:
When I was in Israel last year, I felt so safe compared to the US. Every citizen is a soldier there, by choice of course. They've been fighting for their lands since Genesis. They know how to fight terrorism.

I don't think the US will become Isreal because we have a our traditions, but we need to learn from Isreal and continue onto support them.
 
omcf said:
Israel is relaxing the restrictions it currently has. If the U.S. followed that thinking,...
If the U. S. adopted the new, relaxed Israeli restrictions it would be about as hard to own a gun in the U. S. as it is now to get a concealed weapons permit in New York City or parts of California.

In almost all of the United States it is already far easier to be able to legally carry a gun in public than it is in Israel, even under their new, "relaxed" policies.
 
DEEP SOUTH - "If you keep in mind that gun control is about control, not guns these questions answer themselves. Reason want [sic] convince them, nor will logic, nor statics, nor polling, nor public opinion, nor anything else.

The only thing that matters is getting to their desired end, what they'll have to do, ignore, blame, or condemn is irrelevant. "

You are 100% correct. The anti-self defense, anti-gun culture is hard wired and totally committed to disarming the "worker peasants" and '"serfs" here in the U.S.

Reason, logic, etc., are completely meaningless to them in their quest.

They never, ever, disengage, either.

L.W.
 
If the U. S. adopted the new, relaxed Israeli restrictions it would be about as hard to own a gun in the U. S. as it is now to get a concealed weapons permit in New York City or parts of California.

In almost all of the United States it is already far easier to be able to legally carry a gun in public than it is in Israel, even under their new, "relaxed" policies.
When you quoted me, you left out this part: " ...and relaxed our gun-control restrictions..."

Why did you do that?
 
omcf said:
If the U. S. adopted the new, relaxed Israeli restrictions it would be about as hard to own a gun in the U. S. as it is now to get a concealed weapons permit in New York City or parts of California.

In almost all of the United States it is already far easier to be able to legally carry a gun in public than it is in Israel, even under their new, "relaxed" policies.
When you quoted me, you left out this part: " ...and relaxed our gun-control restrictions..."

Why did you do that?
Because that statement is really meaningless.

Considering how much laxer U. S. requirements already are than Israel's why would Israel's decision to relax their requirements slightly be a signal to us that we should relax ours even more? There is simply no connection.

Already in most of the U. S. an honest person can get a concealed weapons permit almost for the asking. Even some of the most stringent "shall issue" requirements are relatively modest and no real barrier to someone who really wants a permit. In many parts of the U. S. the open carrying of a handgun is legal even without a permit. In some parts of the U.S. a permit isn't even needed to carry a gun concealed.

So how does Israel's decision to relax its licensing requirements to be as stringent (or more stringent) than the toughest "may issue" requirements in the U. S. lead one to the conclusion that we should relax our regulations further. It's a non sequitur.
 
One thing many here are forgetting when they talk about the Israeli requirement for military experience or training. In Israel it is mandatory for all men and women citizens to give two years of military service if they are physically abel. They also get free college education as a result of that service, although none of their college professors are fake sqaws teaching one class for 1/2 a million a year. ;) I believe they are all in the reserves until they aren't physically able too.
 
I believe Frank Ettin's point is that the anti crowd in the US can point at Israel and say "see, all they need are a select few trained citizens to be armed, no need for a system where anyone who wants one can get one"
 
Blackstone said:
I believe Frank Ettin's point is that the anti crowd in the US can point at Israel and say "see, all they need are a select few trained citizens to be armed, no need for a system where anyone who wants one can get one"
And that's absolutely an issue.

These cross cultural arguments are weak and can bite back. Yes, a lot of people in Israel are legally carrying a gun in public. But we tend to forget that these are not "just plain folks" like the gun owners in the United States. If you are legally carrying a gun in public in Israel you are (1) active duty military; or (2) a police officer; or (3) one of the select few* licensed to carry a firearm.

_________
*According to this Wikipdedia article in 2005 about 400,000 private citizens and security guards were licensed in Israel to carry a firearm. The population of Israel in 2005 was about 7 Million, so 400,000 is about 6% of the population.

Wikipedia is often the most reliable source, so if anyone has better numbers, I'd be interested in seeing them.
 
I saw the video on Fox News of the cc civilian removing the threat. It looked like he was wearing a blue shirt , shorts, and a fanny pack. It made me proud that the bad guy was getting the business end.
 
Frank Ettin wrote:

Obviously you haven't read this thread. Israel is not "gunning up." Israel is encouraging the widespread carrying of guns by a very select group of highly qualified persons who have satisfied stringent requirements.

That "very select group" of "highly qualified persons" in a nation of 8 million people will probably amount to several hundred individuals at the very least, and thousands at the most.

I'd call that "gunning up".

Obviously I have read this thread from one end to the other. Your comment is more about an insinuation I'm too stupid to understand the thread than it is about did I read it.
 
gun_with_a_view said:
....That "very select group" of "highly qualified persons" in a nation of 8 million people will probably amount to several hundred individuals at the very least, and thousands at the most.

I'd call that "gunning up".....
Actually, we have reason to believe (see post 37) that in 2005 some 6% of the Israeli population, about 500,000 people had carry licenses. The modest relaxation of the strict Israeli requirements might increase that number slightly.

The real point is that Israel has for many years provided a means for private citizens to become licensed to carry a gun in public. And although the requirements are stringent, people have obtained licenses.

Now Israel will make it slightly easier to be licensed, and that might increase the number of persons licensed to carry a gun in public by some modest amount. If that's "gunning up" to you, your understanding of the phrase is far different from mine.

And in the meantime, in almost every State in the United States it' far easier for someone to legally carry a gun in public than it is in Israel, even under the new Israeli rules.
 
it might prove interesting if the violence escalates, Israel starts allowing widespread if not universal arming of its citizens, when would then see a marked decrease in the success of the terrorist attempts.

Israel can't allow universal arming of its citizens because it has bent over backwards to be a democracy and therefore has a large percentage of Arab citizens, a substantial cohort of whom are the very terrorists that need to be defeated. They have their own political parties and sit in the Knesset. Check out the history of Ms. Zoabi for an example.

They could possibly fast-track the permit approval process for all ex-IDF, that would already be a big help.
 
Speaking of "armed Israeli citizens," here is a video of one who stopped a very brutal attack.

http://concealednation.org/2015/10/...zen-to-take-out-a-terrorist-about-17-seconds/

Also goes to illustrate that often, it takes more than one round to stop an attacker.

L.W.
Yes, the attacker kept getting up again and again after being shot at close range. Notice also that the armed citizen managed to kick away the attacker's weapon fairly early on, he appears to be very well-trained.
 
"These cross cultural arguments are weak and can bite back. Yes, a lot of people in Israel are legally carrying a gun in public. But we tend to forget that these are not "just plain folks" like the gun owners in the United States. If you are legally carrying a gun in public in Israel you are (1) active duty military; or (2) a police officer; or (3) one of the select few* licensed to carry a firearm."

If you read my post above, you will see that there is a fairly substantial #4.
 
Old lady.... Good point regarding universal, although just like in the US... The bad guys will get stuff they want.
 
At least they are taking some steps toward civilian carry. I bet it opens up even more over the next decade. I am sure they have noticed the US concealed carry movement. Keep in mind that they may think of handguns as "defensive only" since handguns lack the power of rifles.
 
As long as we keep in mind that where they are now is exactly where the antigunners would like to go. It's comparatively a very negative setback in regard to our laws.

I'd go so far as to say it would incite severe political repercussions if it was enacted here in the US. 90% of the current CCW licensees and all of the constitutional carriers would have their "privileges" revoked. While a very small and applaudable step for Israel, the reality is that the periodic mental exams for relicensing would be the most onerous part.

"Why do you need to carry?" "Because bad people would try to hurt or rob me if I didn't." "Do you always focus on danger from people around you?" "Well, no." "So people around you for the most part aren't dangerous?" Nobody in their right mind should let lawyers and shrinks decide who is "sane" and who isn't. It's Pre-Cog and can't be assessed to any competent degree. That's the reason we carry firearms, we can't predict the future or decisions yet to be made.

Licensing a few thousand more Israelis among a population of 8.3 million? I know my county alone has that many CCW in a state of 6 million. For a nation plagued with terrorists living inside their borders it's mostly a political gesture and won't result in any serious impact.

There is no good spin to put on this, despite their government beginning to realize they have a problem. It's too little 50 years too late for many of the victims long dead. Parsing sentence structure and interpreting nuance in published news accounts isn't going to make it any better.

Look for their licensing requirements to be announced as a solution toward better gun safety in the US. There is a very close connection to the trend we see in identifying certain personality characteristics among shooters here and a bi-annual mental exam for renewal is exactly what the anti gunners would like to shove down our throats.

The conversation at the mental exam would pretty much read like this thread - "I know what you think I said but I didn't say that." I can see it leading to being patted down before even entering the office. :rolleyes:
 
When the current danger subsides will the permits be withdrawn to previous levels?
One post stated that there are temporary means of arming citizens in Israel and I suspect that any inroads will go as quickly as they came. We certainly don't want to hold up their model anymore than that of the Swiss IMO.
 
Israel can't allow universal arming of its citizens because it has bent over backwards to be a democracy and therefore has a large percentage of Arab citizens, a substantial cohort of whom are the very terrorists that need to be defeated

A wise observation on the part of the old lady that immediately begs the question, have these Arabic citizens of Israel been through that county's compulsory military training?

That really complicates things should the Israeli government decide every citizen who has completed such training is suddenly eligible for a gun carry permit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A wise observation on the part of the old lady that immediately begs the question, have these Arabic citizens of Israel been through that county's compulsory military training?

That really complicates things should the Israeli government decide every citizen who has completed such training is suddenly eligible for a gun carry permit.

No, the "Palestinian" Arabs don't serve in the IDF.

The Druze do serve and many have distinguished themselves both in the IDF and the police. In the terrorist attack on a Jerusalem synagogue last year a Druze traffic officer was the closest LEO, he only had a handgun and no body armor but he charged right in and although sadly he was killed he did save numerous lives first.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top