This article and what he apparently says in his book makes me much more comfortable with him. He's up front and honest about previously backing more gun control which at least one other leading candidate is lying about. And it appears he actually went back and looked into what it was actually about when it was passed - which is important to me at least.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/05/c...ens-vulnerable-to-criminals-and-tyrants/As Democrats renew a push for gun control after the recent school shooting in Oregon, Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson argues in his new book that an armed citizenry is needed to protect the people against “tyrants” and “radicals.”
“Only law-abiding citizens are affected by legislation imposing gun control,” Carson writes in the book. “The criminals don’t care what the law says, which is why they are criminals. Confiscating the guns of American citizens would violate the Constitution as well as rendering the citizenry vulnerable to criminals and tyrants.”
Carson’s new book, “A More Perfect Union: What We The People Can Do To Reclaim Our Constitutional Liberties,” is set for release Tuesday.
In the book, the former neurosurgeon argues that firearms should be not restricted because “our founders recognized that ‘we the People’ could represent a significant fighting force if necessary to repel an invasion by foreign forces. They also knew that an armed population would discourage government overreach.”
“The founders feared an overbearing central government might attempt to dominate the people and severely curtail their rights,” Carson writes. “This, in fact, is the primary reason that the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights.” (RELATED: Clinton Threatens Unilateral Gun Control)
Carson acknowledges that many people might find it “ludicrous to imagine our federal government trying to seize unconstitutional power and dominate the people.” But citing James Madison, Carson said the founder “could foresee a day in America when radicals might assume power and try to impose upon America a different system of government.”
“His hope was that the establishment of such a different way of life would be difficult in America, because American citizens, having the right to keep and bear arms, would rebel,” Carson writes.
The Republican presidential candidate also references Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany, writing how “German citizens were disarmed by their government in the late 1930s, and by the mid-1940s Hitler’s regime had mercilessly slaughtered six million Jews and numerous others whom they considered inferior.”
Carson, who previously supported tougher gun control measures, said his views changed after studying the Constitution.
“Some will say that they see no problem with small handguns and hunting rifles, perhaps even shotguns,” he writes. “They are opposed to more powerful weaponry such as assault rifles and armor-penetrating ammunition. I too was a member of that camp until I fully recognized the intent of the Second Amendment, which is to protect the freedom of the people from an overly aggressive government.”
Carson writes that Americans “would be at a great disadvantage if they were attacked by an overly aggressive government and all they had to defend themselves with were minor firearms.”
The former neurosurgeon offers one suggestion for cutting down on gun deaths in the United States.
“Rather than trying to control or confiscate guns, it might be smarter to offer free, public gun-safety courses,” he says. “In countries like Switzerland, every man within a certain age range is required to possess a gun and to know how to use it, and Switzerland had one of the lowest gun homicide rates in the world.”
Or, he's seeing the wind direction and sailing with the breeze...
(playing devil's advocate here)..
Or, he's seeing the wind direction and sailing with the breeze...
(playing devil's advocate here)..
I think he'd be trying to hide his previous stance more if he was just trying to garner votes - but it is a valid concern.
I like the fact he went back to the Founders for his research, makes me a lot more confident that he would nominate Originalist judges to the Supreme Court.
Or, he's seeing the wind direction and sailing with the breeze...
(playing devil's advocate here)..
Trump is the one who had to shift in the wind.
Or, he's seeing the wind direction and sailing with the breeze...
(playing devil's advocate here)..
Trump is the one who had to shift in the wind.
What does this mean exactly?
Travis
Or, he's seeing the wind direction and sailing with the breeze...
(playing devil's advocate here)..
Trump is the one who had to shift in the wind.
Trump only had to shift more... Carson's original position was that states could decide for themselves whether to ban scary black rifles, Trump was fully in favor of a national AWB/confiscation.
Cuz, you know... feds have jurisdiction to do anything they want to. It's a position very popular with most liberals.
Or, he's seeing the wind direction and sailing with the breeze...
(playing devil's advocate here)..
Trump is the one who had to shift in the wind.
What does this mean exactly?
Travis
Trump has come a long ways in the 15 years since he wrote in The America We Deserve, which laid out his positions on a variety of subjects.
Here’s what he wrote about gun control:
It’s often argued that the American murder rate is high because guns are more available here than in other countries. After a tragedy like the massacre at Columbine High School, anyone could feel that it is too easy for Americans to get their hands on weapons. But nobody has a good solution. This is another issue where you see the extremes of the two existing major parties.
Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed. The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions.
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within seventy-two hours if a potential gun owner has a record.
So his latest opinion differs from his previous opinion.
Wow. Won't find that in any other political candidate.
Travis
Carson is the smartest guy in the race. A lot of people down play him because he's not very experienced in governing and foreign affairs. But he's a fast learner to say the least. He's a good judge of the difference between right and wrong. He's got good common sense.
Yesterday I watched an interview with Trump. He came right out and said it....."even though the police got there quick, if a teacher or student had been carrying a weapon, they would have been able to stop it a lot faster and could have possibly saved some lives".
Too bad we can't follow Switzerland's lead.
Yesterday I watched an interview with Trump. He came right out and said it....."even though the police got there quick, if a teacher or student had been carrying a weapon, they would have been able to stop it a lot faster and could have possibly saved some lives".
What's the old saying?
"Cops, just minutes away when seconds count."
Guns is one of the issues that makes me uncomfortable about Carson; but I still like the guy and feel he would do a good job. He's smart enough to know where his bread is buttered and that gun control will sink any and all support he has.
At the same time, he's smart enough that I think he'll generally make good decisions as a president.
We could do WAAAAAY worse than Carson for President.
At least one candidate (him) seems to have an operational brain at times.
Geno
PS, I certainly don't agree with all of what he says but he may end up being one I support.
He's a surgeon, a good one, with some good ideas, not a national leader.
No leadership experience, DC and world wise politicians would eat him up.
Idaho had a Governor like that awhile back. Good guy, just no leadership experience, and it was a one term mistake.
He's a surgeon, a good one, with some good ideas, not a national leader.
No leadership experience, DC and world wise politicians would eat him up.
Idaho had a Governor like that awhile back. Good guy, just no leadership experience, and it was a one term mistake.
Carson has served for years as one of the top directors at Johns Hopkins Hospital. In charge of a lot of top medical professionals.
And served on the boards of companies like Costco and Kellogg
He'd be so far better than any of the Democrat candidates that it's not even funny. Can you imagine Hillary dealing with Russia - oh, wait, she did. How's that working out for us? How about Socialist Bernie Sanders? Or Joe Biden? That makes shudder just typing it...
Fully understand anybody not preferring him as their first, second or even third pick. But electing him WOULD send a huge message to the Republican establishment, and think of what we could get done domestically if we have both houses of Congress and a non-establishment (mostly) Conservative Republican as President?
"Better than", Okiedokie, if that suits ya.
Didn't he recently reaffirm that he wants to ban semiautomatic firearms and that he and Al Sharpton see eye to eye on this and many issues?
So his latest opinion differs from his previous opinion.
Wow. Won't find that in any other political candidate.
Travis
Try Romney...
The guy that supported government funded health care until he didn't? I did try him. He lost.
Next.
Travis
the issue with Trump and Carson is can you trust them once they are president to actually stick to their campaign promises.
To be perfectly candid, I don't know that I trust either one of them.
Neither Carson nor Trump have had any epiphanies on gun control - their position isn't one out of "you know, I've seen the light" - its a " there is a severe backlash among the people I need to vote for me on this position so I need to change"
The same with Rubio on immigration, Bush on the wars, Fiorina on ...aww who the phug is actually listening to that corporate idiot, on and on.
I can't say that Cruz has done that on his positions.
That said, Trump is the only one that isn't owned, that doesn't base his statements balancing the desires of the voting base to the wants of the money lenders - and as long as he doesn't go completely off the rails, I'm going to support him.
Its a gamble, but so it voting for any of these people. The odds are high that all of them will fail - but I'd rather one be bold about it than nuanced.
I want a president to either succeed like great presidents before him or completely crash and burn. We don't need a gatekeeper who just shows up and compromises, and we need a president we have faith in to accomplish great things.
Carson? no, Fiorina? do I really even have to consider her? Bush, Jindal, Christie, Kasich, Rubio - do you sense the potential for greatness with any of them?
then why support them?
For the primary, support who you want.
For the election, support whoever wins the primary. Because the risks associated with the Dems getting another 4 or 8 years in the White House are too great.
I dunno. I kinda like him.
NEW YORK — Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who trails only Donald Trump at the top of the Republican presidential field, says the lesson of the nation's latest mass shooting isn't to enact more limits on guns but to consider whether gun-free zones actually may be drawing shooters.
Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson (Photo: Michael Monday, for USA TODAY)
In a wide-ranging interview with Capital Download, Carson endorsed expanding efforts to identify and treat the mentally ill before they commit acts of violence. He also suggested it might make sense to arm kindergarten teachers, and he rejected as wrong-headed proposals to restore the ban on military-style assault weapons.
"Would that have prevented this? No," Carson told USA TODAY's weekly newsmaker series. "Would it have prevented the one before? No. I'm for doing things that work, not for things that stroke the emotions."
Carson outlines how he says his political philosophy on gun control and other issues is grounded in the Constitution in a new book, A More Perfect Union, being published Tuesday by Sentinel. One of the trio of outsiders who have shaken the GOP race this year, the renowned pediatric neurosurgeon combines a soft-spoken manner with strongly held and hard-edged conservative views, particularly on social issues.
Ben Carson's new book, "A More Perfect Union: What We the People Can Do to Reclaim Our Constitutional more
"If I had a little kid in kindergarten somewhere I would feel much more comfortable if I knew on that campus there was a police officer or somebody who was trained with a weapon," he says. Including the teacher? "If the teacher was trained in the use of that weapon and had access to it, I would be much more comfortable if they had one than if they didn't."
He says the idea of declaring gun-free zones may be counterproductive. The gunmen "tend to pick places that are gun-free zones," he says. "They aren't likely to go into a place where they are likely to get shot."
He keeps a gun himself at a home he owns in a secluded area, "way out in the country, away from the police, away from anybody," he says. "If someone is, you know, threatening your life or the life of your family and you don't have ready access to the police, I would prefer to have a mechanism for protecting myself."
But he's never had to use it.
The nation's continuing debate over gun control has been spotlighted by the shooting rampage last week at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Ore., that left nine victims dead before the shooter allegedly killed himself. Umpqua bans guns and other weapons, but state law allows people with concealed permits to carry guns on the campus.
While Carson once supported the idea of banning assault weapons and armor-piercing ammunition, he says he changed his mind after he read more about the history of tyranny, a subject explored in his new 240-page book.
Ben Carson greets audience members following a town hall meeting on Oct. 2, 2015, in Ankeny, Iowa. (Photo: Charlie Neibergall, AP)
"Reading people like Daniel Webster, who talked about tyranny in Europe and said it would never occur in America because the American people were armed," he says. "When you look at tyranny and how it occurs, the pattern is so consistent: Get rid of the guns for the people first so you can go in and dominate them."
Asked whether many Americans worried less about the threat from the government and more about the threat of fellow citizens armed with assault rifles, Carson replied: "You need to be able to protect yourself from both."
Carson, now 64, admits to being surprised with his political rise since his address to the National Prayer Breakfast in 2013 drew the attention of evangelical Christians and others who urged him to get into politics. In the RealClearPolitics average of recent national polls, Trump runs first in the Republican field at 23%, followed by Carson at 17% and former CEO Carly Fiorina at 11%. Among the more traditional contenders — that is, those who have previously held elective office —only Florida Sen. Marco Rubio breaks into double digits, at 10%.
USA TODAY
What's the appeal of Ben Carson? Iowans say he inspires
"It says that the people are actually starting to wake up and recognize that politics-as-usual is not taking us where we want to be," Carson says of the strength of the outsider candidates. "In fact, it's leading us in exactly the opposite direction."
He rejects any parallel to the observation that a president should have experience in politics, just as most people wouldn't choose a brain surgeon who had never been in an operating room before. "Neurosurgery is considerably more complicated than politics," he scoffs. "You don't need to know nearly as much to be able to maneuver in the political world as you do in the operating room inside of somebody's brain. It's not even close."
I'm going to vote for whomever Cruz endorses.
Trump wants Palin to take his place when his numbers fall below 20. You hear it hear first.
For the primary, support who you want.
For the election, support whoever wins the primary. Because the risks associated with the Dems getting another 4 or 8 years in the White House are too great.
if the GOP continues to choose lameass candidates to represent their voting base, then who I vote for isn't the risk to the Dems getting the White House.
Seriously, its time to start asking - would the GOP rather lose than have a candidate that threatens their power base?
We already know which candidates will do that, and which ones will be no better than a democrat.
Who we end up with should answer that question.
I won't vote to support a party that worries more about power than prosperity.
So this whole idea of supporting whoever we end up just because he has an "R" by his/her name just falls on deaf ears to me.
(From the article)
Carson acknowledges that many people might find it “ludicrous to imagine our federal government trying to seize unconstitutional power and dominate the people.” But citing James Madison, Carson said the founder “could foresee a day in America when radicals might assume power and try to impose upon America a different system of government.”
Sadly, that day that the Founders feared & attempted to plan for, is very near unless something changes soon.
MM