Attacks on Ben Carson Show Sick Gun-grabber Preference for Death


Ben-Carson-630x508AmmoLandCitizen disarmament zealots are feigning outrage for the media following Republican presidential contender Dr. Ben Carson telling Fox News Tuesday he would probably fight back against a mass shooter, per a report in The Guardian.

To place his comments in context, Carson was responding to being questioned about what he would do if an attacker put a gun in his face and asked him what religion he was.

“I’m glad you asked that question,” Carson answered. “Not only would I probably not cooperate with him, I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. I would say, ‘Hey guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all.’”

“I’ve been doing this for 15 years now and those were some of the ugliest comments that I’ve ever heard,” Ladd Everitt of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence bleated when given a chance for some ink. “[Carson] basically blamed the victims for their own deaths.

“His suggesting that if he had been there, he could have taken the shooter down through the power of Christ or somehow, it’s just unbelievable,” Everitt continued “You begin to question this man’s mental health, doing this with a smile on his face and thinking it’s acceptable. I think it shows how insane Republican politics are at this point in history, how totally insane that they would have that man on, and he’s saying these things and then they’re nodding at him.”

A truism I can’t avoid documenting multiple times on a daily basis is that with “progressives,” every day is Opposite Day. So let’s see for ourselves why Everitt calling someone else insane is yet more corroboration of that observation.

First, Carson never blamed the victims. He merely stated what he would “probably” do. To assert otherwise is quite simply a lie. (Yes, Gomer, you can say it now.)

And Carson never said he could take the shooter down with “the power of Christ,” although that little revelation of contempt for faith is instructive for when gun-grabbers suddenly get all pious and exploit “religion” that serves their secular purposes.



Plus Carson never said he would prevail. He acknowledged he might get shot, while observing, correctly, that a killer would not succeed in taking out everyone if multiple defenders swarmed him.

But enough with just opinions. What do self-defense experts, people who actually know what they’re talking about, have to say? Or forget them, because the antis will just find a reason to question their credibility, especially if they’re NRA-certified. Let’s go instead to the people CSGV believes should enjoy – what do they call it? – a “monopoly of force.”



Let’s ask the government.

What does the Department of Homeland Security instruct us to do if we can’t run, hide or lock ourselves away from a madman with murder on his mind (and no, of course they won’t recommend the most effective option)?

As a last resort, attempt to take the active shooter down. When the shooter is at close range and you cannot flee, your chance of survival is much greater if you try to incapacitate him/her.

Hey wait a minute—that exactly comports with what Carson said, and what Everitt then indignantly whined were some of the ugliest comments he’s ever heard in 15 years of being a professional hoplophobe. But then again, perhaps they pay him because he knows something we don’t. Perhaps he has superior expert credentials that make him qualified to contradict DHS’s advice, and he can share them with us to prove he’s not just spouting an unqualified, incompetent and dangerous opinion?

No?

It’s pretty revealing – not only do these sanctimonious … things not want their countrymen to have the capability of armed defense, they ridicule the concept and the faith of anyone who would presume simply to fight back with whatever means are at hand. That all goes back to their beloved “monopoly of force,” that is, a “monopoly of violence.” And CSGV knows who advocated that, because Executive Director Josh Horwitz wrote a HuffPo piece trying to justify it, citing the philosophical progenitor of the concept, German sociologist and political economist Max Weber. What he didn’t share was that his ideological hero Weber supported approving Article 48 into the Weimar constitution, establishing “emergency powers” to bypass Reichstag consent, and allowing Adolf Hitler’s rise to unchallenged power.

It would seem there are uglier things than self-professed Christian Ben Carson saying he would “probably” do the same thing DHS tells us to do as a last resort if the situation ever becomes that desperate.

Much uglier things. Like “progressives” who would rather see you dead than armed, or even just fighting back.

Codrea

Source: AmmoLand
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution





Previous [PHOTOS] Here Are The 10 Most Dangerous Jobs In The World
Next Liberal Lies About Guns – A Point by Point Breakdown