Ben Carson is politically incorrect on guns

He’s saying a lot of common sense things. Politically incorrect things. The latest is his opinion on guns.

Ben Carson says he would have confronted the Oregon shooter: “He may shoot me but he can’t get us all.” (Los Angeles Times)

He was simply stating what he would do if presented with that situation. The media is hounding him for a comment “clarifying” his statement. It doesn’t need clarification.

It makes sense though, doesn’t it? If everyone rushes the shooter, you may have less casualties. This would not be easy, but it might save a life.

He says the idea of declaring gun-free zones may be counterproductive. The gunmen “tend to pick places that are gun-free zones,” he says. “They aren’t likely to go into a place where they are likely to get shot.” (USA Today)

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, right?

Instead of more gun laws, lets try focusing on the people who are commiting these mass shootings, and see if we can prevent them from getting guns.

Go to the source, and stop the source. What seems to be a common thread of these shooters, is their mental instability.

So how do we stop the source.

Maybe a database, something like the no-fly list system for terrorists, it would flag a mentally ill person, they would be denied access on the spot. No gun for you. That’s it. It doesn’t have to state why they’ve been denied, just denied. Their privacy is still protected. They could be a part of any number of groups that are denied the right to have a gun, convicted felons, for instance.

The reality is, we have restrictions throughout our lives. We can’t drive until a certain age, or drink, or buy cigarettes, or vote, lets add to that list, you cannot own a gun if you have any mental illness, past or present.

It could be taken a step further. A report is generated and sent to the local police, so that they can follow up with an interview, a wellness check if you will. Proactive.

“She (The Oregan shooter’s mother, Mrs. Harper) said that ‘my son is a real big problem of mine,’ ” Ms. Jefferson said in a telephone interview. “She said: ‘He has some psychological problems. Sometimes he takes his medication, sometimes he doesn’t. And that’s where the big problem is, when he doesn’t take his medication.’ ” (New York Times)

Whatever information the police obtain at the wellness check, could be preventative in these instances. For instance, someone not taking their medication.

Ms. Harper, a nurse, said she kept numerous firearms in her home and expressed pride in her knowledge about them, as well as in her son’s expertise on the subject. (New York Times)

It’s also putting family and friends on notice that they could be held accountable if this person, whom they are aware is mentally ill, procures a gun and they stay silent. Accountability.

This woman, who knew that her son struggles with Asperger’s syndrome, should be held accountable. Parents don’t always know what their kids are doing, but this woman, not only knew, she provided the guns, by having them in their home and bringing them into her mentally ill son’s life.

No more political correctness, or politicizing of the gun issue; it’s not working.

Responding to a questioner who asked whether the tragedy had altered his position on the Second Amendment, Carson suggested new gun-control laws wouldn’t solve the problem and accused Democrats of “us[ing] these tragedies to advance a political agenda.” (NBC News)

Let’s get proactive. Not by disarming the law-abiding citizens, and passing yet another gun law, but by arming the citizens with the information needed to protect the citizenry. By holding people accountable that aid, either by way of staying silent, or by ignoring the mental illness, and handing them a gun.

Flag them as unable to purchase a weapon. If they don’t like it, well, too bad. Sometimes, life is not fair. Just ask the parents of their deceased college-aged children.

 (All photos from YouTube videos)