Appearing on Glenn Beck‘s radio show this past week, Dr. Benjamin Carson took a vastly different stance from most conservatives on the issue of gun control, claiming you shouldn’t be able to own semi-automatic weapons in large cities.
Posted on 11/12/2014 8:29:24 AM PST by SoConPubbie
Appearing on Glenn Beck‘s radio show this past week, Dr. Benjamin Carson took a vastly different stance from most conservatives on the issue of gun control, claiming you shouldn’t be able to own semi-automatic weapons in large cities.
Carson became a newfound conservative hero last month when he spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast and laid out a series of criticisms of ObamaCare, political correctness, and tax policy right in front of the president himself. Many called the speech “inappropriate” given the apolitical nature of the event, but many conservatives lauded Carson for his “bold” and “sensible” suggestions for policy reform.
Asked by Beck for his thoughts on the Second Amendment, Carson gave the popular pro-gun argument: “There’s a reason for the Second Amendment; people do have the right to have weapons.”
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 I’m 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, “I’ve no problem with that.”
Watch below, via TheBlaze:
Oh fer cryin’ out loud.
So his wife works at a bank.
That’s what you’ve got on him?
Sheesh.
Where does your wife work?
Dr. Carson could very well be an excellent choice for Surgeon General.
But if he thinks gun ownership is a public health issue, what does he think about physicians grilling their patients about their guns?
Disappointing to say the least.
When I read his book a couple of years ago, I liked the guy, but thought pretty strongly at that point he wasn’t presidential material. Mostly, I just got the gut feeling he wouldn’t like it and would personalize it when he would inevitably get attacked.
I seem to recall he discussed the 2nd Amendment in his book (or it might have been in interview since then) and my first response was “He has the 2nd Amendment completely wrong. He doesn’t understand it.”
I wrote it off to the sentiment a lot of non-gun owners have, that people should be able to have guns for hunting, but there is no reason for anyone to own a semi-automatic weapon...”
That peculiar combination of points about the 2nd Amendment seems to come up over and over and over again.
It cemented it in me when I saw he said it AGAIN, that there were only two reasons he would say that:
1) He is still ignorant of purpose of the 2nd Amendment (and has not bothered to educate himself...bad sign)
2.) He is a liberal on gun rights. Bad sign.
If, after hearing or reading him saying that a few years back, he educated himself and was able to speak cogently about the subject, I would have no problem. But if he is still saying it and believes it, he isn’t someone I will vote for. I can appreciate him as a surgeon and general human being, but I am not going to safeguard my rights by voting him in, because he either doesn’t understand them, or will not work to safeguard them.
“2.) He is a liberal on gun rights. Bad sign.”
Which means he can be persuaded to accept other liberal agenda items.
his words that just killed any chance of him ever being in the WH
“The only reason I have for noy supporting fully automatic is ammo consumption, governments can afford it private citizens cannot”
That is not true, this current ammo shortage is being remedied with new ammunition plants and more imports. Full Automatics are still the right of the people to keep and bear, as they are a military/militia arm. Of course people shouldn’t waste ammo willy nilly, but that’s not a reason to deny people their birthright.
Cruz/Ernst 2016
There is no such thing as soft on the 2nd Amendment, this is Carson being soft.
This man is weak kneed and would be run over by the RATs. Bush41 rerun.
I respect that her bio would be all right with people. It's not OK with me.
I think some cities have already “forced” gun owners to have locking devices on their guns.
Where did all the Carson for President Freepers go? LOL!
Yes, he would be like a bunny rabbit facing a pit bull. He needs to quit before they sink their teeth into him.
Well...exactly. If one can interpret the Constitution to hold any meaning that is perceived as politically advantageous, then...there is no Constitution. (actually, we have long been at the Cow meet Open Constitutional Barn Door stage)
A black guy running for president who think our rights are only what the government or president says they are. How is that different from Obama?.
HHS Secretary in the Cruz Administration or maybe Surgeon General. That’s pretty much it.
Byebye Ben ..we barely knew ye?
“I think if you live in the midst of a lot of people, and I’m afraid that that free speech is going to fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it,”
However, if you live “out in the country somewhere by yourself” and want to speak freely, he added, “I’ve no problem with that.”
Nope. That doesn't help any.
Well, I do prefer to live out in the country, clinging to my guns, and Bible. (He couldn't possibly pay me enough to make me live in a big city, like Baltimore, New York or DC.)
I wonder if he's ever actually fired a gun. I also wonder if he actually understands the difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic firearms. Or that machine guns can be owned legally in about 30 states, provided that one pays the Federal tax, passes the background check and is wealthy enough to buy one and the amount of ammo required.
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.