Posted on 10/08/2015 7:30:48 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Common sense apparently does strange things to some progressive minds. Yesterday morning, speaking on Fox and Friends, Ben Carson said of a mass-shooting situation, “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.’”
The New York Times declared that his statement was “drawing widespread rebuke from his critics and reviving questions about his candidacy.” ABC News asked him to “clarify” his statement, leading to this rather amusing exchange:
ABC: Dr. Carson can you clarify your statements on the Oregon shooting?
Carson: What needs clarification?
ABC: I guess there’s an implication that you’re saying that the students didn’t do enough to save themselves.
Carson: No, I said nothing about them. I said what I would do.
ABC: And can you say what you would do?
Carson: I would ask everybody to attack the gunman because he can only shoot one of us at a time. That way we don’t all wind up dead.
He then laughed and walked away. Later, on Megyn Kelly’s show, he said that he wasn’t laughing at the shooting but rather the “silliness” of the people asking the question. He said that he wanted to “plant the seed in people’s minds so that if this happens again they don’t all get killed.”
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO...
There was a time when the guidance for passengers in airplane hijackings could be summed up in one word: Cooperate. And on September 11, 2001, hijackers used that guidance to guarantee their control of three airplanes — the planes that later flew straight into the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. But on one aircraft, the passengers learned that cooperation meant certain death, and they unilaterally changed the protocols. As a result, it’s now virtually unthinkable that American passengers will simply stand by and allow a hijacker to seize an airliner’s controls.
To hail the passengers of Flight 93 is not to condemn the passengers of Flight 11, Flight 175, and Flight 77. In a terrifying situation, they were doing what they were taught to do.
The current guidance for victims in mass-shooting situations is just as passive as the original guidance for hijacking victims. “Shelter in place,” they’re told. In other words, hide and wait for rescue. Carson is urging a change in the paradigm, to immediate group resistance.
The key word here is “group.” The sad stories of mass shootings are replete with tales of individual heroism, of the one man who charged the attacker only to be shot down. In Oregon, Chris Mintz resisted and was shot multiple times. At Fort Hood, Captain John Gaffney reportedly died charging Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan. But where one man fails, two or three can succeed — just ask Spencer Stone, Alek Skarlatos, and Anthony Sadler, the three American men who foiled an August terrorist attack on a French train.
Should the defining characteristic of Americans under fire — whether from terrorists or from depraved gunmen — be their eagerness to shelter or their courage to resist? And should a presidential candidate prioritize “sensitivity” over all other virtues? Carson is urging Americans to change their thinking, to take responsibility for their own defense. In a previous era, this would be called leadership. Now, all too many people just call it mean.
As I’ve said before, none of us can truly know how we’ll respond to a crisis until we face that ultimate test, but aspiration is the first step to action, and we can and should urge our fellow Americans to fight — together, immediately, and viciously — when confronted by a mortal threat. “Shelter in place” is supposed to mean “wait for help.” All too often it means “wait to die.” Those are not American words. They are not in keeping with American culture. On Flight 93, the battle cry was “Let’s roll.” On a train in Belgium, it was “Let’s go.” Those are the right words — the American words — for defeating evil.
—David French is an attorney and a staff writer at National Review.
**Flying chairs stop bullets and hurt the shooters who then can’t aim.**
Chairs. Books. Whatever you can throw.
You may be taken out, but in all likelihood by being passive you are just extending your own life by a matter of seconds or a minute.
Go out like a warrior.
More open carry states would help.
Herself, Madame Benghazi, the Cold & Joyless, is no friend of an armed and vigilant citizenry. The Communists, once in power, were certainly not supporters of the idea that the vast majority of its subjects should have access to any kind of self-defense, but in Russia, that idea had long been ingrained in the society, so there was never much resistance even under the czars, when the Cossacks rode into town.
The Iranians, never a very well behaved bunch, could clearly NEVER trust their citizens with personal weaponry, again using violence and threats of even more violence to keep a measure of order in a land that except for the stern rule, would quickly descend into something like Afghanistan, where tribes are arrayed against anything like a central authority.
The NRA proceeds from a totally different philosophy, that of personal and individual responsibility, and its symbolism, that of personal firearms, is the ancient and inborn NEED to provide for self-defense, in the name of self-preservation. Because if YOU do not look out for YOU, then who else would? Certainly not that narcissist that cannot even conceive of the notion that others, as much as himself (or herself), has interests to protect and preserve.
It is apparent you have never fired any kind of firearm in your life.
Dr. Carson is right in my opinion. ‘He who complies, dies’.
Stuff like this BS ‘question’ THEN (sort of) attacking Carson for not ‘agreeing’ with the reporter must make them be amazed when ANYONE talks to them.
Then ‘Clintoon’ says gun owners fall right in with Iranians and Communists - which is a strange comparison as TODAYS Liberals are seemingly in bed with Iran and a goodly number of them more or less follow the Communist guide line.
There was a time when restaurants would be robbed at night and the on duty crew herded into the freezer where they would be shot in the back of the head....
I can’t (or won’t) speak for anyone else BUT if I am laying on the floor and the first guy gets shot the only way you are going to shoot ME in the back of the head is for you to be standing on my back...You may shoot me in the face but going to have to work at getting me in the back of the head.
Back in ‘our day’ of growing up, Police may not have been as educated or as well trained or all ‘muscled’ up with military style weapons, but it is hard to imagine scores of police standing around with shooting going on in a building and not have a couple of them ‘charge’ the building - Right, Wrong or indifferent.
I personally am one of the few that reacts to a fire or shooting by going towards the action, not cringing or crouching behind something.
May not be the smartest move, but damned if I can just sit there and let the madness continue without me trying to do something.
Of course todays mindset would have the guy rushing the scene be blamed for everything.
There was a guy on FOX last night commenting on Carson’s comment(s). He’s an anti-torrorism expert, former SEAL. He agrees with Carson ....but acknowledged that not all people are former SEALs. There were 4 points he wanted to make:
1. Understand what a critical area is and critical time frames. Know when you are in a critical area. For example: schools are critical areas. 3 a.m. is not a critical time at a school because people aren’t around, but school hours are as this is when you are most likely to be attacked.
2. Have a plan of what to do - train your mind. Think about these things in advance - if I’m sitting in my xx class & a shooter turns up, what will I do?
3. Be aware of normal and ‘not normal’ behavior. Situational alertness/awareness.
4. Decide if you are going to act - we need to be an empowered citizenry that acts together.
I will add one more thought. Gavin de Becker wrote a great book “The Gift of Fear”. Often, your instincts will kick in to tell you that something is not right or that you are in actual danger before your brain can process the situation & present you with a rational thought (my poor way of explaining what he was saying). Bottom line, listen to your ‘gut instincts’ ... if you have a feeling that something is not right, instead of explaining it away, listen to your gut feeling and act on it. Many times, people are in danger, are alerted instinctively to it, but because they are polite, don’t want to offend anyone, or don’t want to raise a fuss or risk embarrassing themselves, they will explain it away or continue to be polite. Women, in particular, are particularly susceptible to behaving this way. Criminals use this tendency to prey on people.
A sign that reads, “This is a gun free zone” is the same as a sign that says, “Come and get us.”
2. hide
3. attack
Applying a slow stead backward pressure with my index finger
“Carson thinks he can turn himself into Superman??...faster than a speeding bullet....the result would be everyone killed in less than two seconds.”
Seriously?
The gunman is just as hyped up on adrenaline as everyone else. His muscle coordination is way down. His aim is not nearly as good as it is at the range. One object—a notebook, a chair, anything—thrown at him coupled with a charge is way better than standing there and being a target. Plus, if you are moving, he’s less likely to hit you in a vital area. The rule at close range is “charge a gun, flee a knife.”
Well before the “first responders” is the “unwilling participants.” The unwilling participants need to consider responding first.
Carson’s strategy is very good. I never thought of it. An attacker should be rushed in any situation: plane, theater, school, church, ...
That strategy might deter attackers almost as much as if the potential victims had guns.
You are assuming a full-automatic weapon? While a person can pull a trigger pretty quickly in a semi-automatic weapon, still, being able to be of more than a couple shots a second with any degree of aim is a pretty impressive feat.
Which means in a crowd of ten, all rushing the shooter, actually one being hit is about all the shooter is going to get off.
Full-automatic weapons are widely unavailable anywhere in the US, unless stolen from a military armory, and that is a major crime in and of itself.
Disbelieving, fear and shock can have a paralyzing force on unprepared minds. You have to train yourself to be ready to act
Running for the silliest post of the year award?
Some will het hit and possibly die. All will get shot dead if lined up cooperatively by the gun man.
Are you really this stupid?
Just stand there and be a victim then idiot.
A conversation:
Well-intentioned Liberal: “Excuse me sir, but this is a gun free zone”
Mr Maniac: “Bang, bang, bang, you’re dead”
JMHO but an active shooter who is about to kill someone has all his senses focused into a narrow tunnel with his intended target at the far end, to enhance the thrill of the kill.
At that moment he may well be unable to sense a counterattack from his side or rear.
Thoughts?
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.