The Case: Luke v. A Pawn Shop
BACKGROUND
Joshua Higbee was one of three people killed when Cedric Ford opened fire on February 25, 2016, at the Excel Industries factory in Hesston, Kansas. Ford’s shooting spree began in Newton, Kansas, and ended at Excel Industries, where his colleague, Joshua was working that day. Another 14 people were injured that day, and a fourth victim later died. Higbee is survived by his wife, Subrina Luke, and his 7-year-old son.
A convicted felon, Ford was prohibited from purchasing and possessing firearms. Yet he was armed with a Zastava Serbia AK-47 semi-automatic rifle and a Glock Model 22 .40 caliber semi-automatic handgun. He obtained the two guns through straw purchases conducted at A Pawn Shop in Newton, Kansas. The shop transferred the guns to Ford’s ex-girlfriend, Sarah Jo Hopkins, even though she paid the gun dealer with a credit card in Ford’s name. Federal law prohibited Ford, a convicted felon, from purchasing and possessing firearms.
One indicator of a straw sale is when someone other than the gun buyer pays for the gun. The prosecution argues that if this gun dealer had paid attention to obvious signs of a straw purchase, Higbee’s young son would have a father, and his wife would have a husband.
Questions to consider:
-Can a merchant be held responsible for actions of the purchaser after the sale?
-Can a vendor sell a weapon without knowledge of who he/she is really selling to?
-Should our “default” assumption about weapons purchasers by that they are criminals (in which case we need proof that they are not criminals in order to sell them a weapon) or that they are law-abiding citizens (in which case we need proof that they are dangerous to prevent a sale)?
(18) So God led the people roundabout, by way of the wilderness at the Sea of Reeds. Now the Israelites went up armed out of the land of Egypt.
וטעם וחמושים עלו בני ישראל... ויש אומרים (ראב''ע) שספר הכתוב שיצאו ביד רמה וחשבו להיות גאולים, ולא הלכו כדמות עבדים בורחים:
And the for [saying] 'And Bnei Yisrael went up armed' -... there are those that say [that the reason for the phrase is] that the verse is telling us that they left 'with a raised hand' and they considered themselves redeemed people, and they did not walk like slaves who ran away.
According to the Ramban, the Israelites were not truly free until they were armed. Their weaponry was a demonstration of their autonomy and ability to protect themselves in the event of any attack that might come their way.
1) Is the right to bear arms fundamental to our ability to see ourselves as truly free?
2) In what circumstances can this right be revoked?
ועוד תניא אין מוכרין להם לא זיין ולא כלי זיין ואין משחיזין להן את הזיין ואין מוכרין להן לא סדן ולא קולרין ולא כבלים ולא שלשלאות של ברזל אחד עובד כוכבים ואחד כותי...א"ר דימי בר אבא כדרך שאסור למכור לעובד כוכבים אסור למכור ללסטים ישראל
And furthermore, it is taught in a baraita: One may not sell weapons to gentiles or the auxiliary equipment of weapons, and one may not sharpen weapons for them. And one may not sell them stocks used for fastening the feet of prisoners, or iron neck chains [kolarin], or foot chains, or iron chains...
Rav Dimi Bar Abba said: In a likewise manner, that which it is forbidden to sell to an idolater [it is also] forbidden to sell to an Israelite [i.e. Jewish] bandit.
1) The Gemara in Avodah Zarah states that we are forbidden from selling non-Jews or bandits weapons because we have a reasonable suspicion that they would use them for negative purposes. Does this mean that we need to know the intents of the people buying weapons/ammunition from us?
2) Nowadays there are background checks performed on people buying guns in most gun sales. Should we trust that a background check is sufficient proof that a person has no intent to use a weapon for negative purposes? How far does our obligation extend to look into what purposes this gun will be used for?
(ח) כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין מוֹכְרִין לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים דְּבָרִים שֶׁמַּחֲזִיקִין בָּהֶן יְדֵיהֶן לַעֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים כָּךְ אֵין מוֹכְרִין לָהֶם דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ נֵזֶק לָרַבִּים כְּגוֹן דֻּבִּים וַאֲרָיוֹת וּכְלֵי זַיִן וּכְבָלִים וְשַׁלְשְׁלָאוֹת. וְאֵין מַשְׁחִיזִין לָהֶם אֶת הַזַּיִן. וְכָל שֶׁאָסוּר לְמָכְרוֹ לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים אָסוּר לְמָכְרוֹ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל הֶחָשׁוּד לִמְכֹּר לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים. וְכֵן אָסוּר לִמְכֹּר כְּלֵי נֵזֶק לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לִסְטִים:
(ט) הָיוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל שׁוֹכְנִים בֵּין הָעוֹבְדֵי כּוֹכָבִים וְכָרְתוּ לָהֶם בְּרִית מֻתָּר לִמְכֹּר כְּלֵי זַיִן לְעַבְדֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ וְגֵיסוֹתָיו מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעוֹשִׂים בָּהֶם מִלְחָמָה עִם צָרֵי הַמְּדִינָה לְהַצִּילָהּ וְנִמְצְאוּ מְגִנִּים עָלֵינוּ שֶׁהֲרֵי אָנוּ שְׁרוּיִין בְּתוֹכָם
8) Just as one may not sell to idolaters items which they could use in their idolatrous practices, so also may one not sell to them things which can cause damage to the public, such as bears, lions, weapons, dogs, man-traps, et cetera, nor may one sharpen their sword for them. It is forbidden to sell to a Jew who is suspected of dealing with idolaters any item which one may not sell [directly] to an idolater, nor may one sell to Jewish bandits items that can cause damage.
9) If Jews living amongst idolaters made a covenant with them, it is permitted for them to sell weapons to the king's subjects and soldiers, because they will fight the enemies of the country, and will [as a result] be protecting the Jews who live amongst them.
1) The Rambam adds a caveat to the limitation on selling weapons to idolators, noting that we can sell to these people if we made a deal with them that they would use these weapons to help protect us. Should this caveat apply to gun owners, most of whom use them for protection? Can we assume that they have no nefarious intent given our shared social contract as Americans?
(8) When you build a new house, you shall make a fence around your roof, so that you will not be responsible for any death in/upon your house when any man fall from it.
ולא תשים דמים בביתך כי יפול הנופל, if it were to happen that someone falls off that roof you could not have been the indirect cause, seeing you had put up a protective railing. Had you not done so, your family might bear part of the guilt for such a mishap.
1) The Torah believes that certain things, like a roof, are inherently dangerous, and a person is liable for any damage caused by them unless they add a way of protecting people from this damage. Would a gun qualify as such an "inherently dangerous" object?
2) How does this apply to a gun seller? What kinds of protections should they be obligated to take to ensure no harm will come from this weapon?
(19) Lamech took to himself two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other was Zillah. (20) Adah bore Jabal; he was the ancestor of those who dwell in tents and amidst herds. (21) And the name of his brother was Jubal; he was the ancestor of all who play the lyre and the pipe. (22) As for Zillah, she bore Tubal-cain, who forged all implements of copper and iron. And the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah. (23) And Lamech said to his wives, “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; O wives of Lamech, give ear to my speech. I have/Have I slain a man for wounding me, And a lad for bruising me(?) (grammar unclear)
הנראה בעיני כי היה למך איש חכם מאד בכל מלאכת מחשבת ולמד לבנו הבכור ענין המרעה כפי טבעי הבהמות ולמד את השני חכמת הנגון ולמד את השלישי ללטוש ולעשות חרבות ורמחים וחניתות וכל כלי המלחמה והיו נשיו מתפחדות שלא יענש כי הביא החרב והרציחה בעולם והנה הוא תופש מעשה אבותיו בידו כי הוא בן המרצח הראשון וברא משחית לחבל והוא אמר להן אני לא הרגתי איש לפצעים ולא ילד לחבורות כאשר עשה קין ולא יענישני השם אבל ישמרני מן ההריגה יותר ממנו והזכיר כן לומר כי לא בחרב וחנית יכול אדם להרוג בפצעים וחבורות שימית במיתה רעה יותר מן החרב ואין החרב גורם הרציחה ואין על העושו חטא
It appears to me that Lamech (a descendant of Kayin whose son invented iron tools) was a very smart man knowledgeable in all types of creative work. He taught his oldest son tooks to use in shepharding animals, taught his second son knowledge about musical instruments, and taught his third son how to sharpen swords and spears and daggers and all other tools of war. His wives were concerned that he might be liable to face punishment from God for bringing swords and murder into the world, and because he was following in the bad footsteps of his ancestor Kayin, the first murderer, and he created sharp tools of war. He responded to them, "I haven't killed or wounded anyone like Kayin did, and therefore won't be punished by God. A man cannot murder or wound another person as a result of a weapon, as this person would just kill or would in another, worse manner if he did not have access to these weapons. Weapons don't cause murder, and therefore the inventor of weapons is not a sinner by virtue of what he created.
(ח) וכן כל מכשול שיש בו סכנת נפשות מצות עשה להסירו ולהשמר ממנו ולהזהר בדבר יפה שנאמר השמר לך ושמור נפשך ואם לא הסיר והניח המכשולות המביאים לידי סכנה ביטל מצות עשה ועובר בלא תשים דמים:
With regard to any obstacle that can cause damage, there is a positive commandment to remove and keep it away from someone who would be tempted to cause damage with it, as the Torah tells us to protect ourselves. If we do not keep dangerous objects away from people who would be tempted to use them for harm, we are not actively fulfilling the positive commandment to protect ourselves, and we are violating the prohibition against being involved in a death.
כל העובר על דברים אלו וכיוצא בהם ואמר הריני מסכן בעצמי ומה לאחרים עלי בכך או איני מקפיד בכך מכין אותו מכת מרדות והנזהר מהם עליו תבא ברכת טוב :
Anyone who violates these precepts, or those like them, and says "I am hereby endangering myself, and I take responsibility for any danger that comes to others as a result of my actions", or "I am willfully disregarding the risks to others of my actions", such a person is lashed for their rebellious ways, and a persons who warns them not to do this actions will receive a good blessing.
1) The Ramban seems to argue that "guns don't kill people, people kill people". The Shulchan Aruch seems to argue the opposite position. Do you think "guns kill people?
2) Two different positions are presented in these sources regarding whether the person who provides a person with a weapon is responsible for the damage caused by it. Which of these positions do you think is more in line with the other texts.