“We can either live in a paranoid politically correct world frantically trying not to offend the Hitlers and Mohammeds, and blaming their victims when they kill, or we can be free men and women who have chosen to take the power to defend our rights into our own hands.

While a thousand organizations use the Holocaust as a platform for speeches about tolerance, Children Of Jewish Holocaust Survivors [Jews Can Shoot] is conducting firearms training… Freedom is not defended with empty idealism easily perverted into appeasement of evil, but with the force of arms.”

Daniel Greenfield / Sultan Knish blog

All too many of the other great tragedies of history - Stalin's atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few - were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece... If a few hundred Jewish fighter in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Silveira v. Lockyer, 2003

Habah l'hargecha hashkem l'hargo -- "If someone is coming to kill you, rise against him and kill him first."

Second Amendment

The Right to Protest and Assemble in America

by Doris Wise Montrose on February 3, 2026

I am not a lawyer. This essay is a summary of my own research into the constitutional language and historical legal concepts that define our right to gather. It is intended as a contribution to the ongoing public discussion about what “the right to protest” actually means under American law.

In the United States, the right people casually call “the right to protest” exists only in a peaceable form. That limitation is not political, rhetorical, or optional. It is explicit in constitutional language, reinforced by legal doctrine, and applied consistently across federal, state, county, and city government.

1. The Constitutional Foundation (Federal)

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

“Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The word “peaceably” is doing real legal work. It is a condition, not a courtesy. From the start:

Only peaceable assembly is constitutionally protected.
Violence, rioting, intimidation, or destruction immediately voids First Amendment protection.
Federal Regulation: The federal government may regulate time, place, and manner, especially on federal property (courts, military bases, Capitol grounds).
There has never been a constitutional right to violent assembly in the United States.

By Doris Wise

Dems Move to Ban Direct Online Ammo Sales Nationwide

NM Senate committee advances bill to train firearm dealers, ban sale of ‘extremely dangerous’ guns

SUPPORT THE WORK OF JEWS CAN SHOOT

Antisemitism is increasing. So are efforts to restrict fundamental rights. Are you paying attention to how—and why?

Antisemitic incidents are rising across political and ideological lines. The resulting violence is no longer sporadic or abstract; it is a recurring reality confronting Jewish communities with growing frequency.

At the same time, attempts to limit the right to keep and bear arms continue unabated. These efforts are not confined to moments of crisis or tied to any single administration. They represent a long-term, coordinated push that advances regardless of who holds power.

Jews Can Shoot operates where these two trends intersect.

I document and analyze antisemitism and gun control together, over time and in context. Too often, these issues are reported in isolation—treated as disconnected events rather than parts of a broader pattern. Our work focuses on continuity, not headlines.

History is instructive. Measures first justified as “necessary” for Jews have a way of becoming precedents applied far more broadly. Cultural narratives, legal arguments, and policy frameworks rarely stop with their initial targets.

The weekly newsletter provides readers with accurate, well-sourced information to help identify these patterns as they emerge—not after they are entrenched.

This work requires consistent research, monitoring, and editorial effort.

If you value informed vigilance over complacency, I ask for your support.

A one-time or monthly contribution helps ensure that this radar stays on—and independent.

Don’t be a spectator to your own disarmament.