Associate Editor

Depending on which Jew is asked, last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision establishing an individual's right to bear arms will either make America safer or increase business for undertakers.

Attorney Alan Gura firmly believes the former -- and he apparently argued his position persuasively enough to pave the way for a landmark high court ruling. Gura was the lead attorney for the winning side in the case of the District of Columbia vs. Heller.

Gura, who is also a regular Capital Schmoozing columnist for WJW, called the ruling "fantastic," maintaining in an interview this week that the right to bear arms is "one of the most important" freedoms that Americans enjoy because it is often a life-or-death issue.

A number of major Jewish organizations, however, have condemned the decision, which they believe will simply make America a more violent place. They include the American Jewish Committee, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the American Jewish Congress and the National Council of Jewish Women.

The RAC, for example, said it was "disappointed" by the ruling, which it said in a press release could lead to the "unchecked proliferation of firearms and a society in which each citizen is potentially armed to the teeth." The American "culture of violence stemming from our too-lax gun control laws will only be fed by today's ruling," the release continued.

Gura, in contrast, said statistics indicate that gun ownership tends to reduce crime and increase public safety. Moreover, self-protection is a fundamental right, he added, because citizens cannot always depend on the government to protect them from criminals or tyrannical rulers. He said Jews, in particular, should take note.

"We should examine our history and see that our reliance on governmental officials to preserve our liberties has not always worked out so well," explained Gura, who considers himself a libertarian. "There is still anti-Semitism. The sad fact is that many Jews have the option of being armed or dead and not that many prefer to be armed."

Asked why Jews seem disproportionately opposed to gun ownership, Gura said, "It's puzzling. Many Jews seem to prefer heavy government intervention, and it's not a good thing." Jews, he said, often have the mistaken belief "that the government is a beneficent force to always do good and help people out."

An Israeli native now living in Alexandria, where he attends the Conservative Agudas Achim Congregation, Gura, 37, came to the United States with his family when he was 7. They settled in Los Angeles. He received his undergraduate degree in government from Cornell University and his law degree from Georgetown University. Gura, whose law practice, Gura and Possessky, has offices Alexandria and D.C., focuses mainly on civil rights and intellectual property matters.

Gura, who with his wife has a 1-year-old son, first became a gun owner in the early 1990s because, he said, he wanted to be able to defend himself against crime. Among the contributing factors in his decision to buy a weapon were the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, which Gura said he watched on TV "with a great deal of concern" while he was in college at Cornell. He said he has never used the gun in self-defense.

Gura was hired to handle the case in 2003 by social acquaintance Robert Levy, a nonpracticing attorney and libertarian scholar. Levy and another lawyer recruited the plaintiffs, six D.C. residents who wanted to own handguns.

The Heller case was the first time Gura had argued a case before the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, he said he was not nervous. "It was a totally unique experience," he added. "It was very exciting, a great feeling. The justices are very congenial and they're dedicated to achieving the right results."

A number of Jewish organizations are sorry to see Gura's view prevail with the court.

The AJCongress termed the Heller ruling "bad law and even worse public policy," adding: "The ultimate outcome of today's decision is that it increases the likelihood that many Americans will die needlessly of gun violence."

According to NCJW, the ruling is a reminder of "the importance of the Supreme Court and the ability of five of its members to remake our laws using the prism of a right-wing agenda" that President George W. Bush has helped push through his appointments to the high court. As a result, NCJW "will continue our grassroots campaign to promote a judiciary that will protect the fundamental rights of all."

The AJCommittee also expressed "disappointment" over the decision, adding: "Gun control protects liberty, rather than restricts it."

Aaron Zelman, like Gura, disagrees entirely. He is the founder and director of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, a 19-year-old Wisconsin-based organization that Zelman said has about 5,000 dues-paying members worldwide, most of them in the United States.

Zelman, 62, said the ruling benefits law-abiding citizens because "criminals don't like people defending themselves." As for Jews, "we have a God-given right to defend our lives," he added. "What right does the state have to overturn God's law?

Still, he said the ruling may be nothing more than a "rhetorical victory" if the ideological composition of the Supreme Court changes under the next president. "Heller," he added, "is not set in stone."