Skip to comments.From bad to worse: Dr. Ben Carson cannot be trusted on gun rights
Posted on 05/29/2014 9:53:54 PM PDT by Nachum
Dr. Ben Carson, potential contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, has been enjoying near "rock star" status in ostensibly conservative circles. If that continues, "conservatives" had might as well give up trying to cast themselves as representing the "pro-gun" position, because Carson's stance on guns is one that would probably not displease the Brady Campaign.
Carson first raised gun owners' hackles in March, 2013, when he blithely told Glenn Beck that the right to own semi-automatic firearms is contingent on where one lives. From Mediate:
But when asked whether people should be allowed to own semi-automatic weapons, the doctor replied: It depends on where you live.
I think if you live in the midst of a lot of people, and Im afraid that that semi-automatic weapon is going to fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it, Carson elaborated.
However, if you live out in the country somewhere by yourself and want to own a semi-automatic weapon, he added, Ive no problem with that.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Funny the Klan felt the same way about Blacks and guns.
Dr. Carson is a smart man. He can be reasoned with. That is a good start.
go ahead ...elect more democrats.....its pathetic the way so called "conservatives" and "freepers" destroy candidates on our side while electing every single stinking rat...
Dr. Ben Carson is a damn good man but he’s not presidential timber. Who’s pushing him to even think he could be a presidential contender? My guess is the establishment is in the one calling the shots for the good doctor.
Well, I wouldn’t want crazy people getting my guns either.
The Dems really have nothing to worry about; we’ll destroy our own candidates than you!
I swear, the Dems must laugh their collective A$$es of at us. And we call the GOPe the “Stupid Party”? Pfft.
“Whos pushing him to even think he could be a presidential contender? “
Not me. Although, anyone who pisses off Klownie the Kenyan at his own roast and shuts him up deserves my vote.
If he doesn’t understand the second amendment then he doesn’t really understand anything.
I am afraid to say that I agree with Carson. It depends where you live. If you live, say for the sake of argument, in America, then you can own guns. But if you live in North Korea, generally, no, you will not be allowed to own firearms.
Whether or not the good doctor has the correct view on gun rights is not an important question.
A candidacy on his part would be just another sideshow taking away votes from more serious conservative candidates with the experience necessary to put policies into practice and choose the right people to keep the government running efficiently, effectively, and Constitutionally.
This reads to me like friendly fire agit-prop.
If Carson is as smart and compassionate and principled and experienced and life-saving as his history suggests, then let's not "ruh roh" every little purity screed that someone decides to publish.
Let's be a little bit more reasoned and balanced in how we interpret the long run.
Jf being a purists means that I only promote and vote for candidates that well if required even to their last full measure to stand by their oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America then I am a purist and I will wear that badge proudly. If you can stand by the Law of the Land you have no business holding any office from Dog Catcher to POTUS.
I’d love for him to be my doctor, but not necessarily my president.
Carson is opening the door for gun control, he doesn’t have the spine needed to protect 2A.
“Carson is a good guy but he is not Presidential material.”
And according to FReepers, neither were any of the 2012 candidates...that’s why we were ultimately stuck with Romney.
We will ensure every candidate we have next election is deemed: “Not Presidential Material”, “Not ready for prime time”, “Needs more experience” etc.
As I said, the Dems have nothing to worry about; we’ll eat our own as we did in 2012.
I am going to take a wild guess that you either didn’t read the article at all in the first place, or you have never had any appreciation for the NRA nor the Second Ammendment, or both.
We can figure out who is “pure”, if they are simply uncompromising on upholding the Constitution and don’t suggest that we compromise it either.
Carson is a pleasant, intellegent and credentialed man in surgical medicine, but who bases the 2nd Ammendment on your address.
The article tracks his evolution of statements. Get a grip on what’s real, not the imagery.
I'm not a purist, and hardly a holy man. Moreover, I don't expect any candidate to match my every single stinking thought. But, I have two fundamental expectations of any person running for office, be it in the executive, legislative or (where judges are elected), the judicial branch. 1. That individual must support the right to life. If they don't, they philosophically communicate that every life is subject to the whims of government, and 2. They must unabashedly support the right of the individual to possess the means to defend themselves and their loved ones.
An anti-gun pol is either ignorant of the studies and statistics that overwhelmingly show the beneficial effects of an armed populace and ignorant of the historic and philosophical underpinnings of the Second Amendment, or they are perfectly aware of such things, and their desire to disarm the populace springs from far more insidious motives to concentrate power in the hands of government and foster dependence. Any anti-gun politician falls into one of those two categories: ignorant or malevolent. Sorry, but we already have more than enough of both types in offices throughout the land. Not going to give my vote to help elect one more. I would give Carson the benefit of the doubt and presume he falls into the ignorant category. If he educates himself in this area, and convinces me that he fully grasps the import of the Second Amendment, I could vote for him, but I would need to believe it was a true conversion and embrace.
I agree with you. As brilliant a surgeon as he is, his political sense is not up to par, and it's hard to believe some cynical GOP-e type isn't behind his "presidential aspirations." He has much to offer the conservative side despite his gun stance.
Not “every single stinking thought” but unambiguously supporting our God given, constitutionally guaranteed rights would be nice. I do not consider myself a “purist” because I want elected officials who can read, understand and support the Constitution. I think his reported comment that “it depends on where I live” if I can exercise a supposedly inalienable right is a despicable thing to say. I would not want this guy in any position where he could impact any of my rights.
You make a point on possibly some Establishment backing for Carson.
Certainly the Establishment intend to see the primary field of candidates flooded, again, conservatives divided among the field, again, and then run their guy up the middle, again, with a flood of big money behind him, again, about the time we hit Florida, again.
This is why one can reasonably wonder if the Republican Party can be changed from the inside, at least before the clock runs out.
It is disturbing to think that anyone would consider this man a contender for POTUS. He makes a few conservative points in a public setting, then stumbles his way through a laughable series of non-conservative admissions, and he has no experience in any office - and yet people want him to be president for what reason? Is this another affirmative action charity case? Is that what we need?
If people want to support and promote a true Black conservative who knows what he’s about, I suggest they get behind Allen West, not this lightweight. A West/Palin ticket, or vice versa, would assuage your conscience if you need diversity, AND it would bring a solid conservative ticket into focus for the first time since Reagan.
Carson is, perhaps, many things admirable, but he’s not presidential, and he’s not steeped in solidly conservative thought.
If it was Carson vs Hitlery in 2016, what would you do?
A lot of people voted for Ross Perot who was pro-abortion and rabidly anti-gun, he wanted to go door to door and confiscate them.
Some have need to be charmed, are unserious and basically a danger to the Republic.
Grown ups know the Constitution and that preserving and protecting it with our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor is fundamental to our survival as a Republic.
Guns are sometimes necessary to guarantee that. Who the H£// calls that “eating your own”, or, “here comes the purists”? Carson blew the question. Simple.
He eliminated himself, we didn’t.
It's legal now if you can afford both the 200 dollar tax and the price of an old gun like a Thompson or a BAR.
They have it set up so only old full auto weapons are allowed so those old weapons command a pretty steep price.
I don’t know but I don’t believe either one will be their party’s nominee.
Dumb question. Dumb answer.
Dr. Carson is not ready for prime time.
I agree about either one being the nominee. I’d vote for Carson if that was to be.
I think Hitlery is going to raise a bunch of money and then make an excuse not to run. Then she’ll pocket most of the money.
No, he’s not. I’d vote for him in a second if he was up against Hitlery.
Condi and Alan West or Palin, doesn't matter who is at the top of the ticket.
Could not agree more. The Great Pretender currently occupying the White House confirms your concerns in spades.
So you’d vote for any smart moderate as your candidate for president?
It’s amazing how certain Freepers will swoon over any potential black nominee for president. Carson is also pro-amnesty, which is a guarantee of all future Democrats as president. But some Freepers can’t resist the idea of supporting him for president.
You could have the right, but not be wise to use it. The question he is actually answering is whether it would be WISE to have a high-penetration weapon in the city. Probably not. And if you used it anyhow and the bullet went into the next apartment and killed someone, don’t cry about the repercussions.
If one right can be restricted by zip code, then they all can.
And there is no shortage of crazy people living in rural areas, either.
Ben Carson is dangerously wrong on this.
He’s talking about what’s wise, IMHO. It might not be that difficult to get him to make a distinction between what’s wise and what ought to be a regulation set in stone.
Thats not true at all.
2012 here played out different from that
Sarah sarah Sarah.....did not run
Then Newt and the Ricks
Romney was last resort
Carson is just black.....otherwise he would be me or you
Well meaning conservatives who are nobodies to national media
While all this was happening Romney was standing pretty.
Finally, after everyone from a Texas governor to a retail industry businessman to a former House Speaker had had their time in the limelight - and a spectacular crash - the only person left was Romney.
What happened next? Romney moves in and sweeps 43 delegates. His NEXT competitor was Santorum with 6. SIX!
Now, I cannot vote. I am not an American citizen, and all I could do is watch from the sidelines. I used to think the Achilles heel of Conservatism was lethargy (from when I was helping in grassroots campaigning for the Bush admin, and realized most young people couldn't give a damn), and then I thought it was not having a proper narrative that espoused the advantages of Conservatism (I still think that is a BIG issue). However, I have realized another big issue exists. Maybe even bigger than our apparent inability to craft an appealing narrative.
That flaw is that we eat our own.
If a candidate is not perfect - in any way - we fire away. Now, I am not saying that we should accept compromises left, right and center.
However, before we start destroying (mostly) Conservative candidates, we should first ensure that the RINOs/CINOs are eliminated first. First get rid of the Romneys and McCains from the running, and then once that is done y'all are more than welcome to turn guns on each other to your heart's content. This is because, once it is only (mostly) Conservative candidates left, then whomever wins will at least be mostly conservative.
However, if we destroy our own first - even with their flaws - we guarantee that the last man/woman standing is a barely Conservative.
My hope is that the next GOP primaries will include lessons learned from the 2012 Cycle. That we will work towards ensuring that the Barely Conservatives are kicked out early, and then people can pound away at each other.
However, I am convinced that the party as a whole is not that ....logical (I wanted to say 'intelligent') ...and that it will be a repeat of 2012. We will destroy anyone who is 80% of what we want, and yet we will not be turning focus on the Barely Conservative who is around 35% of what we want.
Result: That is how a Jeb Bush can become the nominee! Yes, you read that. That is how a Jeb Bush can end up as the nominee.
Now, once something like that (not necessarily Jeb) happens, the Conservative Base is demoralized, the GOP elite guy will not ahve full support, and that GOP nominee will face a Democrat nominee (maybe Hillary Clinton) and a Liberal base that is very energized over the 'First Female President.' This will be more formidable than the 'First Black President,' but I do not expect the GOP to realize that. Hillary can be defeated, but it will require serious work.
Result? Another replay of Obama beating McCain or Obama beating Romney. I know some say it was due to rigging, but the truth is that any rigging was simply icing on the cake.
Then there will be 4 more years of posting on FR, following which the whole cycle will be repeated.
The GOP elite really laugh at Conservatives, but not as much as the Liberals do.
NOTE: This is not support for Dr. Carson. It is a general post about the general field of Conservative Candidates once the GOP Primary starts. Defeat the Barely Conservative candidate first, and then we can sling mud at each other.
Dr. Carson is a smart man whose views have likely been based on what he has experienced as as an MD in a not so lovely neighborhood.
Nope. He’s a well recognized pediatric neurosurgeon; not an MD in a bad neighborhood.
Would that be the Condi Rice who voted for the Current Occupant?
A liberal rag trying to preemptively turn conservatives on a potential (and I question that “fact”) GOP candidate...
While I disagree with Ben Carson on his view of guns, I am not, and hopefully we are all not a single-issue voter. As president, he cannot single handedly implement gun control. He’s never stated any intentions of attacking the second amendment. I think this is simply a preemptive liberal attack, and a good one from some of the responses. If you’re a single-issue voter, you are a handicap to our conservative movement...
And Like Huckabee and Santorum before him, he will suck all the wind out of the process, drag it out and deflect any Conservative Alternative from emerging to the point we end up with Jeb, just like en up with McCain and Romney...
Their is a one non politico I think will throw their hat in, but mums the word for now and he is a game changer...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.