Gun Control and Halacha

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 [note: these are all types of restraints]. This prohibition applies equally to both a gentile and a Samaritan.

MISHNA: One may not sell bears, or lions, or any item that can cause injury to the public, to gentiles...

(12) It is forbidden to sell gentiles any weaponry. We may not sharpen weapons for them or sell them a knife, chains put on the necks of prisoners, fetters, iron chains, raw Indian iron, bears, lions, or any other object that could cause danger to people at large. One may, however, sell them shields, for these serve only the purpose of defense.

(13) Just as it is forbidden to sell such weaponry to a gentile, so too, is it forbidden to sell it to a Jew who will (re)sell it to a gentile.
It is permitted to sell weapons to the soldiers of the country in which one lives, because they defend the Jewish inhabitants of the land.

(14) Every article that is forbidden to be sold to a gentile is also forbidden to be sold to a Jewish robber, for by doing so one reinforces a transgressor and causes him to sin.
Similarly, anyone who causes a person who is blind with regard to a certain matter to stumble and gives him improper advice, or who reinforces a transgressor - who is spiritually blind, for he does not see the path of truth, because of the desires of his heart - transgresses a negative commandment, as Leviticus 19:14 states: "Do not place an obstacle in front of a blind man." When a person comes to ask advice from you, give him proper counsel.

(9) When the Jews dwell among the idolaters and have established a covenant with them, it is permissible to sell weapons to the servants of the king and his to his soldiers, because they use them to wage war against the enemies of the country and to protect it. Thus, they also protect us, for we dwell among them.

It is forbidden to sell to non-Jews, as well as to Jews who are suspected of (re)selling to non-Jews, as well as to Jewish bandits, objects whose use could cause a danger to public safety, such as, for example, bears, lions. The sale of weapons or any iron object that can be used in combat is also prohibited. It is also forbidden to sharpen the weapons that belong to them. Finally, a Jew must not build a scaffold (for executions) at the behest of non-Jewish judges.

(8) When you build a new house, you shall make a parapet for your roof, so that you do not bring bloodguilt on your house if anyone should fall from it.

(9) The sages also prohibited the breeding of swine in any place, or of dogs, unless they are chained. One may, however, breed dogs in a town near the border. A dog should be tied up by day and untied at night. The sages said: "Cursed be the man who breeds dogs or pigs," because the damage they do is substantial and frequent.

Rabbi Natan says: From where is it derived that one may not raise a vicious dog in his house, and one may not set up an unstable ladder in his house? The verse states: “You shall not bring blood into your house” (Deuteronomy 22:8), i.e., one may not allow a hazardous situation or item to remain in one’s house. As long as the belligerent dog or cat is still alive, the owner is in violation of this verse and therefore the court may excommunicate him for failing to remove the danger.

(8) Likewise, one has a positive duty to remove and guard oneself of any life-threatening obstacle, as it is said "beware and guard your soul". If one did not removed said obstacles, one has cancelled a positive commandment and transgressed "do not bring bloodguilt" (Deut. 22:8).

GEMARA: The Sages taught a baraita that elucidates the mishna’s ruling: With regard to anything for which I became responsible for safeguarding it to prevent it from causing damage, if it in fact causes damage, it is considered as if I actively facilitated that damage and accordingly must pay for it. How so? In the case of an ox or a pit that one transferred to the care of a deaf-mute, an insane person, or a minor, whose presumed limited intellectual capacity means they are deemed incapable of sufficiently safeguarding them from causing damage, and the ox or pit caused damage, the halakha is that since the owner of the ox or pit did not fulfill his duty to safeguard them, he is liable to pay for the damage, which is not so in a corresponding case where the damage is caused by a fire.

Rather, the baraita must be dealing with an untethered ox or an exposed pit, which can cause damage in the manner in which the owner left them. If so, then the case in the corresponding situation of fire, where he is not liable, is where one transferred a flame to one of limited halakhic competence, which can also cause damage in this form. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: But if so, why does the baraita state: Which is not so in the case of damage caused by a fire, as one is exempt from paying damages? But this is untenable, as didn’t Reish Lakish say in the name of Ḥizkiyya: They taught that one is exempt from damage caused by a fire only in a case where he transferred an ember to one of limited halakhic competence who then fanned it into a flame. But if he transferred a flame to him, the one who transferred the flame to him is liable for any damage caused. What is the reason? He is responsible because the capacity for it to cause damage is certain.

The Gemara explains: You could answer as follows: The typical manner of an ox is to free itself from being tethered and the typical manner of a pit is for its cover to become dislodged. Therefore, as it is negligent to transfer an ox or pit to someone who is incapable of sufficiently safeguarding them, the one who transferred the ox or flame to them is liable. By contrast, with regard to an ember, as long as he leaves it alone it progressively dims, and the only way in which it will cause damage is if someone else actively fans it into a flame; therefore, he is not liable.

The Gemara explains: There, in the case of fire, ultimately the deaf-mute’s handling [tzevata] of the flame causes the damage, as if it were not for him moving the flame no damage would have been caused. Here, in the case of the ox and the pit, the deaf-mute’s handling of them does not cause the damage. Rather, the damage was caused even though they remained in exactly the same dangerous state in which the one who had transferred them to the deaf-mute did so. Therefore, the damage is a result of that person’s negligence, and he is liable.

(15) And guard your lives exceedingly...

(1) If the thief is seized while tunneling, and he is beaten to death, there is no bloodguilt in his case.

If one comes to kill you, kill him first.

The Sages said that a man may neither go out on Shabbat with a sword, nor with a bow, nor with a shield, nor with a club, nor with a spear. And if he unwittingly went out with one of these weapons to the public domain he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

Rabbi Eliezer says: These weapons are ornaments [i.e. jewelry or decorations] for him; just as a man is permitted to go out into the public domain with other ornaments, he is permitted to go out with weapons.

And the Rabbis say: They are nothing other than reprehensible and in the future they will be eliminated, as it is written: “And they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation will not raise sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore” (Isaiah 2:4).