CARSON: When government looks more like foe than friend [The Continuing Education of Ben Carson, MD]

The Washington Times ^ | April 22, 2014 | Ben S. Carson

[sitetest]

The Bundy case in Nevada provides many insights into the state of our nation with respect to the relationship between the people and the government.

The Bundys appear to be honorable American citizens without adequate legal counsel to help resolve a federal land issue about which they disagree with the Bureau of Land Management. Without question, they violated some of the innumerable laws and regulations that continue to entangle every aspect of American life.

[sitetest]

The education of Dr. Ben Carson continues. A very encouraging sign. Dr. Carson, who had previously seemed a little mushy on the whole Second Amendment business, appears to have had a moment of clarity.

[sitetest]

I didn’t see this otherwise posted. My apologies if it’s a repeat.

[sitetest]

Too many words?

[BitWielder1]

... should take solace in knowing that many military and law enforcement personnel would likely refuse to obey commands inconsistent with freedom and American values.

I hope it's true but how can one count on it in any particular case?
I am glad he's waking up to the real reasons for 2A.

[Gaffer]

I agree, especially after having been disappointed in his recent foray into the “vote GOPe meme” some feel we have to do, even if the GOPe RINOs are the lesser of two evils.

I am encouraged by the basic thought of this article and it’s fundamental clarity.

[magellan]

This really sums it up:

"The senator readily referred to the Bundys and their supporters as “domestic terrorists,” but the current administration is reticent about applying the same term to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who admitted slaughtering more than a dozen people in 2009 at Fort Hood in Texas. What does this tell us about our government and its perceptions and alignments?"

Bundy = Domestic Terrorist

Hasan = Workplace Violence

[sitetest]

Dear BitWielder1,

Yes, I'd originally included in the excerpt Dr. Carson's strongest language concerning the Second Amendment, in that, part of its original purpose was to prevent the imposition of tyranny by the government, itself, but I guess I excerpted too much of the article.

I encourage folks to read the whole thing at the Wash Times in spite of their annoying audio ads that start up upon loading the page.

sitetest

[sitetest]

I agree.

[MrB]

Yes, Dr Carson, there IS a reason that The People need the means to resist government tyranny,

and a reason the founders made sure to enshrine that ability in the second amendment.

[Beagle8U]

“We must be reasonable and willing to engage in conversation about how to limit the availability of dangerous weapons to criminals and very violent or insane people.”

He needs to explain how he plans to do that since criminals don’t follow existing laws, new laws can only effect law abiding citizens.

Sorry Ben, you still have a gungrabber mindset.

I think he makes it up as he goes along, whatever he thinks the public will fall for.

[Ms. Blunt]

It’s good to see he clarified his statement on the 2nd and limited it to criminals and mentally unstable, as it should be, by pointing to people instead of guns.

[marktwain]

Yes. It was only a short while ago that he was calling for gun registration and a ban on a “assault weapons”, or so I recall.

[Resettozero]

The education of Dr. Ben Carson continues. A very encouraging sign. Dr. Carson, who had previously seemed a little mushy on the whole Second Amendment business, appears to have had a moment of clarity.

Perhaps it isn't so much the education of Dr. Carson as it is his helping educate some people who follow and admire him? People not as advanced in their political understanding as are most posters on FR?

[Gaffer]

I didn’t read that one, but there was another talking about relenting to GOPe RINOism and voting for them anyway so they could ‘tackle’ the economy - meanwhile letting things like entitlements, amnesty (implied) and other economy-contributing factors alone for later. It was really just a plea for “one more time folks - go along get along - don’t rock the GOPe boat) It really honked me off as I recall.

[sitetest]

Dear Beagle8U,

“Sorry Ben, you still have a gungrabber mindset.”

Time will tell.

But this editorial suggests his views have changed.

That's why I added my own comment about “continuing” education, not about “completed” education.

sitetest

[Graybeard58]

Carson lost me by defending the thug Trayvon Martin.

[sitetest]

Dear Resettorzero,

So.... He held these views all along, but just pretended to be in favor of some gun control in order to get the initial intention of his target audience?

That's not my view. I think now that he's out of the cocoon of Johns Hopkins Hospital and in a world where extreme systemic complexity and regulation of action and behavior [especially as forced on us by the government] don't work as well as they did in the rarefied air at Johns Hopkins, he's learning new things.

sitetest

[BeadCounter]

I could care less what the rules of Baltimore are, I can’t believe people think they must impose the way they think on others who live 1000s of miles away.

[BeadCounter]

I personally don’t feel I need to impose laws on the people of Baltimore thousands of miles away, perhaps others feel differently.

[sitetest]

Dear BeadCounter,

Not sure I understand your intention.

Are you saying, “If Baltimore needs gun control, that's okay by me, let them figure out what they need for themselves.”?

Or are you saying something different?

Thanks,

sitetest