Ben Carson on the 2nd amendment

So I was told by two boys here that Carson wanted to take away our guns. When you have 13 minutes to spare, please listen what the man himself says:

Advertisements

62 thoughts on “Ben Carson on the 2nd amendment

  1. All you have shown us is — like ALL ‘politicians’ – Carson can and will flip-flop and clarify his positions when he realizes he has stepped in it with the voters.

    Sorry, I have not changed my opinion of him.

    HOWEVER, given his support for this Obama trade policy we don;t get to see until we pass it, I think I have dropped my support for Cruz.

    • Didn’t know Cruz supported TPP….. disturbing. I should like proof of Carson’s comments that upset you, because I understand being misunderstood. Obviously, you didn’t watch the entire clip…

      • Kells, I have HEARD — from his own mouth — HEARD Carson explain that HE thinks there are times when we should and shouldn’t be allowed to have weapons. OK, fine. I will agree with you. Now, do you accept that I — ME — now have the authority to decide when you can and cannot exercise your right to life? And if you object, I’ll ‘explain it away’ in terms that sound more like what you want to hear then demand you accept my ‘clarification.’

        If you do not accept my ‘clarification,’ then you have just nailed my problem with Carson.

              • You’re sounding more like the “sweet young maiden” in the Barnacle Bill song.

                The Bill Whittle video is VERY good as it utilizes an expert in the usage and meaning of the English language and the 1st Amendment in articulating the intent and actual meaning of the 2nd Amendment.

                  • Let me see if I can remember how to word this:

                    Ah, ring-a-ding-ding, NO! I did not reference abortion. I said, if you agree with Carson’s belief that he can decide when I can and cannot exercise my rights, then you must agree with my claim that I can decide the same for you, as well. I just chose to decide when you can live. Not my fault if Carson decided to plant his flag on a lesser right. Maybe I should count that as another strike against his judgment? 🙂

                  • Not hard. Let me help you.

                    (1) Carson-dialogue-when we Can and CANNOT have or carry weapons
                    For sake of argument agree that he has authority to say this ( Which he DOESN’T, consitutionally or via Natural rights).

                    Then by analogy:

                    (2) Women folk – “reproduction rights” – The similar authority to choose WHEN and WHERE and IF you can exercise those “Rights”. But he would “dialogue” about it first.

                    Likewise : Carson is arguing Life and Liberty issues and claiming authority to Choose When and How and IF an individual can have the right to their Life and Liberty dependent upon Where they live…… as determined by Carson’s criteria of Urban versus rural. Which he progressively “softens” by appealing to having a “dialogue” about whether or not one has the right to choose HOW they protect their Life and Liberty.

                    Which is the dialectical OPPOSITE of what Natural Rights means. We are not to “dialogue” with any person or government about the rights given to us by our Creator.

                    • Use the hearing aide yourself as I sent you a video in his own voice where he CLEARLY states his views on LIMITING access to guns…..according to HIS ( Carson’s) Criteria.

            • Don,

              Apparently she DOES need help understanding the clear meaning of words as ‘analogy’ is not the only definition she has missed in this exchange 😦

              • She DOESN’T need help understanding that she is dealing with two very headstrong morons. Ben Carson is reasonable as well as intelligent. You may go on pimping your message, and allow Dan to prostitute for you, but the reality is that this country needs a practical, conservative mind.

                • It’s Don not Dan….although I am dapper. Carson is indeed intelligen, I agreet. At least you didn’t call us headstrong Mormons…. wheew.

                  I can only wear flats, heels kill me…..so I can’t be a prostitute….sorry to disappoint.

                    • Yes your comment was RUDE.

                      But I forgive you….and not based solely on your gender … :- )). There is very little feminine about me, so trust me flats are best ….. flip flop flats at that.

    • Bingo on Cruz.

      Mike Lee is appearing to be the 100 % Constitutionalist versus the 94% “Constitutionalist” Cruz…… guess Cruz’s wife’s membership in the Council on Foreign Relations ( CFR) and connections to Goldman Sachs DOES count in the same way it always has.

      I just heard some idiot on the Rush show with Roger Hedgecock claim that Paul Ryan quote “Doesn’t play Politics” …… Kinda say it all huh!?

          • That STUPIDITY will not work on me any more. In fact, if you vote for ANYONE other than someone who has clearly demonstrated they understand the CONSTITUTION and will not budge or fudge on its principles or ideals, the Progressives Thanks YOU!

          • You’re right the Democrats will vote for destruction via socialism by voting for a “sex organ”.

            And the GOP will vote for destruction via Socialism via bigger government and Secret deals with Crony Corporations.

          • No, Hillary is a Progressive. She thanks YOU!

            BTW: you do realize you are admitting to being insane, don;t you? You are going to do the same thing you have been doing for decades and you still think this time will be different (silly rabbit).

      • Cruz voted to support the process of fast track authority, not the actual trade bill (TPP). The TPP and the TPA are not the same thing. He has not decided whether he will support TPP or not right now. Cruz said that he wants to look at the final text of the bill and make a decision then. Fast track authority would enable a new Republican President to actually make some trade deals that could help the American economy. Up until Obama no-one really had a problem passing fast track authority, as it is the only way any other country that we want to do business with will negotiate. Congress still gets the up or down vote on the bills, but it stops the unions and environmentalists, and any politician that wants to pack deals with pork or personal constituency favors, from doing so. Anything that stops Pelosi, Warren, Schumer, Reid and the unions from interfering with trade deals is a good thing. Just because TPA has passed, doesn’t mean that the TPP will. That way the Republican president in 2016 will have fast-track authority, without the Democrats being able to vote it down.

        • ” Fast track authority would enable a new Republican President to actually make some trade deals that could help the American economy.”

          STOP! That line right there is all I need to know. I WILL NOT VOTE REPUBLICAN — PERIOD! That line proves that you are all for the Progressive agenda, you just want to be the ones who gets to exercise its power.

          No thank you. I’m out of this game.

        • So Cruz wants “Pass the bill so we can find out what’s in it”….Just like Pelosi. There is little to no differences anymore !!.
          I campaigned for Ted down here in Texas….. It appears he is yet another Conservative Fraud. He wants to give MORE authority to Obama ( we already know from leaks that Obama gets Broad Immigration authority and Foreign laws will partilly govern and limit American’s 2nd Amendment rights with the TPPA).

          Here is the link so people can see for themselves that Cruz didn’t even read the entire bill and waffles on whether it is a treaty or not

          http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-jeff-sessions-is-wrong-about-obamatrade-deal-full-audio/

    • Well, Dear, at minutes 51:00 through 54:00, I believe he describes you perfectly.

      I agree with his idea of dialogue as I do find it unreasonable to openly sell rocket launchers in inner-city Chicago as criminals seem to do more than enough damage with handguns.

      It is interesting to me that he also makes the comment that America is heading over Niagara Falls, and instead of worrying about the barnacles on the side of the ship, we must concern ourselves with turning the ship around. I feel that you and B. concern yourselves so much with barnacles that you shall throw out the baby out with the bathwater.

      • You must know by now that it is impossible to describe Don by mere campaign rhetoric…. let alone progressive rhetoric.

        However He, as do you, engages in Progressive politics par excellence.
        One sees the word “compromise” soon oozing out of his mug ( and by extension yours too ) as he makes the analogy of our Natural Rights and Bill of Rights being mere “barnacles” on a ship. And the next personal attack ( which is Straight out of Alinsky BTW)…. will be to call up the phrase ” these folks ( Constitutionalists and Bill of Rights supporters ) are demanding a Litmus test for Candidates to be Conservative enough ….”.

        The fact is he has stated his positions….. in his own words…. MANY times…… and wants to TELL us which versionof what he has said we should get behind and believe. Otherwise we are Barnacles and “Un-Compromising” throw-backs.

        I believe what the Bill of Rights says, because I believe what the Declaration says about Natural Creator given rights…… and I believe these FAR exceed Political Campaign Speeches in their authority, especially as regards individual rights. Thus I am against Tyranny of any kind as well as its sugar-coated word-smithing and personal attack methods.

        He has said what he said. I didn’t say those things about limiting rights. And I am not interested in anyone who wants to have a “dialogue” about infringing or limiting those rights for me or anyone else.

        • All right. You vote for the candidate who wants to openly sell rocket launchers. (I don’t really know which one that could be, but apparently you and B.do.) As far as the analogy of the barnacles, the opening part of the sentence was to vote for someone with conservative principles. It was made well before he even threw his hat in to the ring!

      • If I was allowed to open carry, and Don and any other RESPONSIBLE citizen was allowed to actually have and exercise their rights, you would not have a criminal problem because they would be dead!

  2. And here he says AGAIN that the government ( ie HIM as a potential President ) would forbid semi-automatic guns in cities. But he is so ” generously” OK with country folk having them.

    This is NOT Pro 2nd Amendment….. it is Progre4ssivism 101 !!!! He has been changing his tune SOLELY because of election Hyperbole. Just like John McCain played the “conservative” Anti-illegal/ pro Border security Guy to dupe the Dopes in Arizona into voting him in again.

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/conservative-hero-ben-carson-to-beck-you-have-no-right-to-semi-automatic-weapons-in-large-cities/

  3. Don’t vote for Carson. Vote for a write-in, which will in turn, as designed, systemically keep our country on this path of Hansel und Gretel. For me, I shall sail my ship by a different means. Interesting to note as an aside: Mr. Holier than Thou B.fails to recognize sincerity when it stares him in the face. (And I’m not sorry for that one, pal, Joey).

    After donating to Carson, it is interesting to note his PACs first action for folks to take: 1. PRAY – Pray for our leaders to change this country’s direction. Pray for Dr. Carson and his family that they may have the strength to do God’s will. Pray with 2 Chronicles 7-14 at heart: “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

    You may both bloviate till the cows come home. The fact of the matter is that you have a genuine gentleman who is only hoping the best for this nation. I refuse to resign myself to fools. I bid you goodnight.

    • What you refuse to resign yourself to is the Constitution and someone who will uphold it unequivocally.

      Instead you resign yourself to “hoping for the best”…… Which is exactly the approach Obama took and people swallowed “Hope and Change” completely.

      I will not vote for someone who has already said he WON’T uphold the Bill of Rights.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s