Dr. Carson- we finally know his position on guns, and it's good news!
Posted by Non_mooching_artist 10 years, 10 months ago to News
Finally! I can let out the breath I've been holding regarding Dr. Carson, and his view regarding ownership of guns and gun rights!
Sure, there was one occasion when a person used a semiauto copy of a AK to defend their home, but that's a far cry from "people mowing people down" like a Hollywood shoot-em-up movie.
His handlers need to move on getting him to make a very clear statement about separating the anti-gun noise from the truth.
As to Carson, he worries me because he's just so caring. His influence against Obamacare is welcoming, though.
If you care for me, give me freedom.
I'll never forget a friend of mine, who is a doctor at Mayo, saying they didn't have time to look at every position a candidate had. Then don't vote I replied.
I wish that sentiment would catch on.
I admire your principle but you are no match for Pelosi running around giving addresses to park benches.
My personal opinion is that healthcare insurance has itself caused most of the problems in the healthcare field. It really isn't insurance anymore, it is pre-paid healthcare services. As such, like with anything, people are inclined to try to use as much of it as they can, since it is a fixed cost to them (starting at zero). Unfortunately, the regulatory environment even before the ACA, and now after where it has been amped up multiple times, was such that true catastrophic insurance was difficult to obtain.
It infuriates me that there are "Canada Drug" purchasing syndicates that take advantage of the regulated pricing in Canada and import those drugs to the US. They provide lower cost drugs which drives up (or at least lengthens the duration of) costs in order to recoup R&D and the costs of approval.
Maybe it's their propensity for logical thought and their aversion to bullshit arguments...
and yes, I have a degree in engineering... :)
Rearden: Try pouring a ton of steel without rigid principles. (or building a bridge, or making a huge metal object that successfully flies through the sky in one fell swoop)
BTW Herbert Hoover was a mining engineer.
What do you think?
In an oversimplified nutshell, engineers' jobs are to design, discover or identify solutions to whatever problems they're given.
They can and should evaluate a wide range of potential techniques or methods and choose the best one or ones to POTENTIALLY meet the challenge. Usually, then, someone else picks the 'best one' based on constraints of time, money, resources features and tradeoffs.
MY personal gripe on the subject is that I believe that the plethora of lawyers in nationally elected offices may have all the chops for writing laws and debating them but do NOT have anywhere near the mindset and training to do what I would call the rational, logical, critical thinking EVALUATION of alternatives BEFORE they 'choose the winning solution.'
e.g., 'Poverty is the problem! People don't have enough money! Give them money!'
And the general electorate, also not thinking like that, sends the lawmakers back into office with high regularity and then bitches at them with traditionally low approval ratings for Congress (in general.)
Just a tiny cognitive dissonance there that Woof Blister will never discuss in his Situation Room. Or Mr. 360 or anyone else. Especially voters or the mass media.
Engineers, of course, are human... well, most of us, I think... <humor> but can be easily thwarted by levels of management which take the 'engineering solutions' and modify or discard them based on Non-Critical Thinking or their own prejudices and not by rational evaluation of features, benefits and alternatives. Been there, seen that throughout 34 years with two technology companies, 1968-2002.
Many folks may argue that I'm wrong about these opinions and beliefs, but I've never had to go far in conversations to discover the resulting dissatisfaction or upset folks have because of this exact phenomenon.
I often call it "The Question Behind The Question," when congressmonkeys or local officials or mass media immediately debate the 'obvious solution' to whatever problem is articulated, without ANY effort to ask, "But WHY does THAT happen in the first place?!", which almost always BEGINS to lead us to discovery of the Real ROOT CAUSE of the 'problem.'
Teach that in schools and, though it'll still take some decades to 'cure it,' I believe that it's probably one of the only possible ways to reverse the trends of today (including many of the topics we discuss here!)
:)
Thanks, again!
https://www.facebook.com/MeadowMuffinsBa...
Although I did make friends with some design-types at both companies and found a few that could learn some new views AND could teach me some new things, too! But... just a few.
There have also been many changes in how the military is run over the last thirty years. Obama’s administration has made many sweeping changes to how the military is run. Sooner or later, somebody is going to want to offset those changes.
It use to be that it was difficult to get elected to office without having served in some manner, no matter what your political affiliation. But in this bread and circus environment, comedians can be elected --like Al Franken.
I have many former classmates who are now at the ends of their careers. Went to a reunion a couple of years back and was amazed at the perspective of those still in compared to those who got out.
Besides, political office requires compromise. That's not something that most in the military are comfortable with. You are either giving orders, or taking them and executing. While there is often collaboration, most are conditioned to make decisions, not be wishy-washy.
I guess now-a-days that seems corny, but every time I pass that building, I reflect on the simple craftsmanship of those pots as if they were priceless,.doric columns.
Of course, Eisenhower was before my time. ;)
My mother worked under his general staff at the war dept years before I was born.
“Loose lips, sink ships”
She did mention that MacArthur saw her walking, stopped and picked her and another girl up in his jeep, then gave them a lift to work once.
She mentioned Patton often, but never came to the point. She would start:
“That Patton, one time he...”
Then she would fall into a fit of laughter and end it with: “We all loved him, He was crazy.”
We never got the details. Lol.
I prefer men of the mind, with integrity and openness.
You?
You made one mistake in your comment, Mormons do not serve a compulsory mission, it is entirely voluntary.
Fred Speckmann commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
And I don't think that any veteran looks at the honest disclosure of John Kerry's military and post military conduct as a detriment to political service. I know that I sure don't.
As for the Christian Conservatives being anti-military, buying a ribbon magnet from a third-party vendor is pretty much the nadir of anti-militarism when there's plenty of charities like the USO and Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society that could actually USE the money to aid the troops
caring"? I'd be worried if he WASN'T "so
caring".
You gave the perfect description of Dr. Carson of what makes him so special. Sadly, I doubt if he would make it through the primary election due to his honesty and integrity. In a world where destruction of your opponents is the way elections are won, Dr. Carson would surely not want to engage in such conduct.
Fred Speckmann
commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
"I kind of like his answer. It’s reasoned. Why can’t both sides sit down and discuss their fears? He expressed what his personal views are toward assault weapons, but perhaps after learning more about the issue he will acknowledge that his views would have to take a back-seat to what people want or perhaps his views will evolve. I trust him to take the right steps.”
He just demonstrated he is capable of evolving his opinion quickly. That’s fantastic! I think he is a viable candidate for President. But before we go that route he needs to stop talking about the issues that are only part of the dog and pony show, like gay rights, and the war on women. Republicans continually allow themselves to get sucked into that vortex. Carson needs to give us some sense of his interest or knowledge of global concerns and foreign policies.Republicans need to learn how to drive the conversation.
Carson gets the gun issue. Good job.
I saw an interview he gave on Monday morning, and he unequivocally stated that he has no political aspirations unless there are no viable conservative candidates anywhere. Which is currently, at least so it seems, not the case.
So, how many of your rights, freedoms, and responsibilities are YOU willing to trade for some "intelligent security" as someone else dictates? How much of a nanny state, either overt or covert, do you desire? Because, we should be intelligent and let our gov'ment (who knows its more intelligent than we the people) decide whats good and bad for us... right?
If questions like that make you hot under the collar... If the above made you ill... DO NOT swallow what ANY politician or candidate says at face value... and be very careful when you listen to *any* politician on any side. Even (or especially) your own.
No one I know wants a crazy person to get a semiautomatic rifle period" Why only in an urban area? How does he define "crazy"? What does living alone in the countryside mean? Is his definition the same as mine?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2...
Kind of like blaming the weatherman for the weather.
which is the number one principle of progressivism. It makes me wonder what else he wants us to give up for the good of society. Maybe privacy for natl security? I just don 't know. I am glad he has gotten alot of attention. Heseems honest and forthright
You are very right NMA about people not knowing anything about guns and making proclamations about them. Stupidity of the masses makes it easier for the progressives to work.
On the other hand, were the discussion to move into the realm of religion, - no, hold that for a minute - lets say the discussion moved into discussing the merits of gun ownership and the second amendment, I would feel very well positioned in accepting a lead in our talks and I would expect that he would accept that. I know I hold a much greater understanding of the issue and could impart a lot of information that, based on his comments, he does not have.
Now back to religion, there are just a very few questions a person must be able to correctly answer to be identified as a Christian. The basic theme of salvation and the relationship between God and man pretty well sums up the minimum. That takes care of the rifle range equivalent of point the gun at the target and pull the trigger until the gun goes boom. I think Dr. Ben "gets" that much of it. But were I to ask him about the advantage of "fast or slow" rifling pitch for a particular type of shooting, I suspect I'd just get a blank expression in return.
Dr. Ben is not a theologian and "if" I were to ask him about the "hypostatic union of Christ" I suspect I'd get the same blank expression. While it is important on one level, it's just not going to exceed the noise level in the lives of most Christians today. BUT to a theologian it's a very crucially important aspect involving Christ's humanity and Godhood.
So my point is that while Dr. Ben may lay his belief in some "obligation" at the feet of his faith, it's real roots may be found more in the collectivist teachings of his culture - the culture he has fought his entire life BTW.
Another possible source of his confused statement may lay in his professional credo. The most basic goal of any person working in medicine to help others. No matter to whom he may attribute his drive for success in medicine, the drive to helps others comes first. Finding examples of good people helping others in the bible, it's too easy to say that this is where the drive comes from, but that is not a developed doctrinal statement. Not any more so than a soldier saying he was guided into his profession by reading of Jesus telling Peter to go buy a sward.
Certainly we must evaluate all his positions on the important thing we are dealing with and his faith will be a part of that. I just urge than we examine his positions based on his words and actions, not on what we may think we know of his religion. A lot of false data is mixed in with what most people think they know about religion.
Like I said, I don't think he's spent a lot of time thinking about it.
As for the racial references, their called analogies.
As for his unfamiluararity with guns and the issues that surround them, I'm happy he's making some attempt to grasp the problem. I think he has a very long way to go before he can win over this pro-gun segment of the right wing of the party. He knows it's a weakness and I suspect that we'll hear more about his views in the months to come.
Thank you...I agree he has some work to do to win us over in the gun area. I actually like him a lot. I read his book and watched the movie Gifted Hands. I respect him for what he has accomplished and for speaking out at the prayer breakfast. (Don't hammer me for saying 'prayer'.)
"...adding that the Bible "says we have an obligation to love our fellow man as ourselves...."
I understand that Christianity does not preclude liberty loving individuals. However, In Dr. Carson's case, I want to know what else he thinks I have an obligation to do or give up.
The above extract from Gen. is very plain that Cain is asking God if "He" is his brothers keeper. God does not respond that Cain "is" his brothers keeper. Only "thou knowest" which Cain certainly did since he had killed him.
So please explain the false narrative that proclaims, based on this passage, that I as a Christian am responsible for my brother, who chooses another path?
I would offer that my responsibility to him is no greater than that which is owed to any other thinking, rational member of society. That being to take a reasonable amount of time to explain their error. Such as I'm doing now.