Writing for GQ, writer Drew Magary [above] says “F*CK Ben Carson.” Magary deployed the epithet because presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson dared to advocate defending oneself and others. “The Good Doctor made it clear this week that he iss not only willing to replicate Trump’s signature brand of hot-garbage-spewing, but he’ll say even DUMBER shit. Here is Carson from earlier in the week on the Oregon shooter . . .
‘Not only would I probably not cooperate with him, I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. I would say, ‘Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all.’
Magary goes further, describing Carson’s comments as “stupid.”
You are now bearing witness to an arms race of stupid, because stupid is in such high demand from the GOP base at the present moment.
Having read a couple of Magary’s rants, I’m convinced that he actually believes that self-defense is irrational. Which is rational. To justify civilian disarmament, a disarmist must portray armed self-defense as illegitimate. If a right to self-defense is inherent and legitimate, a natural right to arms is clear.
But convincing people that self-defense as illegitimate is difficult. It goes against human nature, thousands of years of history, and the moral codes of most of the world’s major religions, including Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Confucianism, Hinduism and most proponents of Buddism.
Many people eschew it, though, because they’re unwilling to take responsibility for their own defense. Others do so because they don’t trust themselves to act responsibly. Still others base their calculations on the assumption that governments are benevolent and will protect them.
These arguments work best in cultures that have been so successful in promoting the rule of law that they are extremely peaceful. That’s what happened in England and Wales, and in other parts of the Anglosphere such as Canada and Australia.
Ironically, the more that people believe that violence is common, the harder it is to convince them that self-defense is illegitimate. As crime ramps-up in England and Wales, a resurgence in support of the right of self defense has developed.
Civilian disarmers are self-defeating when they attempt to use the argument that society is violent, therefore people should be disarmed. They are, in a word…well, you know.
©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
There should be a admendment that says. Citizens have the right to lawful self defense. Thereby ending any objection to the Second Amendment, end gun registration and any regulation that prevents that right.
This preserves the rule of and application of the law. Puts criminals on notice and allows citizens who chose to be armed the ability to lawfully defend themselves.
Leaving out the preamble “A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state…” I believe the Second Amendment is and was intended to be exceptionally clear and precise in declaring the right of the people to self defense, even against a tyrannical government. As far as I can tell “…shall not be infringed.” pretty much covers all the bases.
I’m somewhat torn on the word militia. Just finished a book on the life of Washington. After the war, there was no money for a standing army. The fear was replacing the British army with an American one that would enforce or conspire with either the Republican or Federalist parties. Yet Washington knew the nation was vulnerable to foreign powers. The compromise position was a well regulated militia. Meaning the states were responsible for providing troops if they were needed. Balance the right to life liberty and happiness and the continued fighting with Indians along the frontier the right to keep and bear arms was paramount for survival of settlers.
The anti-gunners out there like to say the Second Amendment is outdated, but according to 10 U.S. Code § 311 – Militia: composition and classes:
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85–861, § 1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, § 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
So who is in the militia? Pretty much every able-bodied male citizen. That was last updated in 1993, so no one can say it’s outdated.
Do you think their misreading of the 2nd, is an honest mistake?
“Do you think their misreading of the 2nd, is an honest mistake?”
No.
Even when clearly explained to them what ‘regulated’ means in the vernacular of the late 1700s, they simply dismiss it out-of-hand.
For proof, look at the ‘Heller’ dissent:
“In a dissenting opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens stated that the court’s judgment was “a strained and unpersuasive reading” which overturned longstanding precedent, and that the court had “bestowed a dramatic upheaval in the law”.[51] Stevens also stated that the amendment was notable for the “omission of any statement of purpose related to the right to use firearms for hunting or personal self-defense” which was present in the Declarations of Rights of Pennsylvania and Vermont.[51]
The Stevens dissent seems to rest on four main points of disagreement: that the Founders would have made the individual right aspect of the Second Amendment express if that was what was intended; that the “militia” preamble and exact phrase “to keep and bear arms” demands the conclusion that the Second Amendment touches on state militia service only; that many lower courts’ later “collective-right” reading of the Miller decision constitutes stare decisis, which may only be overturned at great peril; and that the Court has not considered gun-control laws (e.g., the National Firearms Act) unconstitutional. The dissent concludes, “The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons…. I could not possibly conclude that the Framers made such a choice.””
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller#Dissenting_opinions
Regulated meant the same thing in the 1700’s as today.
Stevens is an A@#HIOLE. The Founding Fathers could also never have envisioned the tools by which the government of the people, by the people, and for the people would need to keep the government in check (guns, class action lawsuits, tabloids).
The Declaration of Independence makes clear that the nation was founded on principles which included our right to live. Defending that right is natural
He’s already shown his hand. He is against guns in urban areas and he can see why someone would need them in rural areas. He’s had his entire life prior to that comment to make that foundational decision.
He’s walked this back. While I am not a single issue voter, this is one of the items on my check list that needs to be met.
The Michigan RKBA constitutional amendment is worded in such a way as to leave NO ambiguity on the subject:
“Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state”. Art. I, § 6 (enacted 1963).
1835: “Every person has a right to bear arms for the defence of himself and the State.” Art. I, § 13.
1850: “Every person has a right to bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.” Art. XVIII, § 7.
I think the good doctor will be getting my vote if he makes it to the big game, which I hope he does.
I’m sporting a BC16 bumper sticker these days m’self. Does anyone actually read GQ these days? If this wannabe Viking is representative of their editorial staff I’ll likely continue my decades-long streak of not reading the rag.
I have always wanted to know where the h#ll you found that avatar? LOL
Just a yahoo image search for “baseball furies”.
Apparently he’s said (I’m not sure how recently) that semi-auto weapons should be banned from cities (unless used by the government, of course). That plus his love of drug prohibition and the crime it causes (gotta keep those private prisons full!) ensure that there’s no way I’d vote for him. He’s a goddamn doctor, he knows that marijuana is no worse for you than alcohol, yet he thinks someone should be locked in a cage for decades or killed for using one but not the other.
He started walking that back almost immediately though. His exact words were “I’d rather you didn’t have them” and he later clarified that he was saying if you can’t maintain them without losing them to criminals, he’d rather you didn’t own them(I tend to agree, if you’re that irresponsible, I’d rather you didn’t get them in the first place, but that doesn’t mean that I oppose you having the right, I would just rather you be more cautious with them. Don’t treat them like a 13mm wrench where if you lose it, you just say “oh well”). Nothing wrong with the sentiment so long as he isn’t advocating an actual ban, or regulations.
“Don’t treat them like a 13mm wrench where if you lose it, you just say ‘oh well'”
Aha! So that’s where all those extra 13mm wrenches in my tool box keep coming from! It’s YOU, Tommycat!
Don’t you think this is at least an indication on how he would, or, in this case, wouldn’t support pro 2nd Amendment legislation? Possibly letting this sit on his desk and let it expire. Not championing or leading to restore rights.
Don’t need someone in charge who is wishy washy or against any of our rights.
I was fortunate to be Dr. Carson’s personal driver one weekend many years ago when he came to speak at a bar association event.. . . . The brother is a very polite gentleman and very deep in his thought process. He will get my vote also if he makes it . . . .
He won’t get mine. Deep thought process is fine, works well when your rewiring a brain, good in crafting legislation. My question is what part of his life represents conflict resolution? He’s qualified to oversea a parking dispute with doctors, does he have the instincts to support Israel should they bomb Iran’s nuclear sites or the mental fortitude to lift that burden from Israelis?
Do tell James…the measure of the man, you drove him once.
“does he have the instincts to support Israel should they bomb Iran’s nuclear sites or the mental fortitude to lift that burden from Israelis?”
I don’t get Republican’s obsession with sucking Israel’s dick. They’re their own nation, they can maintain their own military without US taxpayers funding most of it. There’s also absolutely zero reason for American soldiers to die because some Jews on the other side of the world decide to start a war.
Ah, yes, the old “it’s the Joooooz!” straw man.
The Jews on the other side of the world won’t start a war, but they might end one.
I not for gobbling another countries goo either.
To start a war because Iranian’s swear they will end the State of Israel in 25 years, and the West allowing them the method by which it is done, is cause for concern. After they destroy Israel, suppose they no longer want the State of Vermont to exist?
What strawman, Ralph? The person I responded to said he won’t vote for Carson because he’s not convinced that he’d send billions more dollars and US soldier if Israel starts a war. Or are you trying to deny that we send billions of dollars a year (not even counting the military equipment, like aircraft) to Israel?
@MK1010101010101010101
What right does the US have to tell Iran what weapons they can have? Do you want Iran, China, North Korea, etc deciding what weapons the US can have? Like it or not, Israel used force to create a nation smack dab in the middle of a bunch of Muslim nations. They have no one but themselves to blame for that and we have more than enough evidence of their crimes against Palistinians that we know that they’re not “poor wittle victims”.
The US cannot tell any country what weapons the can have. Didn’t work for the US negotiating with North Koreans building and detonated their nuke…and they’re building more.
The difference with Muslim nations is the Islamist have no reservations about ending democratic countries. The question is will Carson support the right of lawful self defense of a nation as well as that of the individual. If he can demonstrate that he can, along with shipping illegals out of the country and shows how he can get Congress to agree, then he gets my vote.
Fact: Publics supports the Palestinians
Fact: The Palestinians supported the Nazis during the war.
Fact: Hamas is the dominant Palestinian political faction.
Low levels of face-to-face social contact ‘can double depression risk’. http://tiny.iavian.net/73p0
Download Drudge Report(@drudgereportapp) from Google Play Store
Fact: Hamas is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim brothethood, an organization founded by Hitler acolyte Hassan Al Banna making The Muslim Brotherhood the Arab Nazi Party.
Conclusion: Publius is a Nazi sympathizer and we can ignore what he says.
wow. the hate is strong. The man handled thousands of complex surgeries so he clearly has a brain. He overcame being the child of a single parent lacking any formal education so he clearly understands hard work and initiative. He speaks his mind and is not apologetic about saying what he means and meaning what he says so he clearly has the ability to be clear in his expectations for those working for him as well as leaders around the world knowing he will be there with support because he promised it (unlike the SOB in office now). He is a man of faith and respects those who live with their faith but at the same understands this is a secular world so he clearly is capable of feeling emotion and empathy for others. Yes, pray tell, what makes him UNQUALIFIED? Is it because he has not been a lying sack of sh!t politician for 40 yrs?
-James aka Dirk.
A complex surgery is conducted in a room with like minded, educated individuals leveraging their expertise to a successful outcome. The product of being successful dispite circumstance reflects on the merits of the individual. To assume this qualifies one to be president of a Republic where competing interest compete for the people’s coin is a projection of hope. And we know the last eight years of hope has landed us.
I have no hate for Carson, I want to know when he steps into the arena of the national battles on our horizon, he in fact takes off the sterile gloves used in an operating room for the mitts used in the cage fight against Democrats. And the wisdom to guide Congress (ones who run the country).
37 years of listening to bullshit on both sides for me is over. We are stumbling along a path that continues to erode citizens rights and liberties the likes I never envision happening. I do not care about which side wins only that the Republic survives.
My brain hurt after reading that…
So…is Drew a racist?
/sarc
There is no other logical conclusion.
One guy is white; the other is black.
If the arbiters of racism have taught us anything, it’s that people of different skin colors cannot disagree with one another without their disagreement solely based on skin color.
Cognitive Dissonance. The government can’t be there to protect me from “gun violence” so we must pass (insert more laws) so the government can gain the magical powers of precognition to protect me from “gun violence”… because laws and government are magic if we only have more laws and government!
I’ve said it often: this is a culture war. In this little skirmish, a silly, feminized beta boy is taking on an alpha — at a distance, of course.
In the case of this particular beta boy, the alpha he’s trying to insult is a man who would have the courage to defend himself just as he had the courage to cut into human brains to save thousands of lives.
There you have it. A great doctor who has saved lives, vs. a silly beta boy who can’t even save his lunch money. And beta boy calls the doctor stupid. What a country.
My giggle for the day.
Haha. Nice.
Please keep in mind this administration and the hopeful candidate Hillary would like you to believe the two are equal. Along this narrative is the only evidence needed to remove Democrats from the WH.
“I have had a gun held on me when I was in a Popeyes organization. Guy comes in, put the gun in my ribs. And I just said, ‘I believe that you want the guy behind the counter.’ ”
Does not seem like a very Alpha stance to me.
Actually, seems kind of cowardly.
I wondered what happened to Magary after I stopped reading that football blog he wrote for…still a dick apparently.
You don’t mean it–another sportswriter gone moonbat?
Since society seems to be programming a race of sheeple who blindly obey and never question, I can see why the fight back incentive is being frowned upon by some.
If I was unarmed and someone just started executing people, be it in Arbys or wherever, you stand a heck of a lot better chance of saving yourself and others by attacking. For one, you are a moving target and not a cowering spineless drone waiting for a bullet.
The good doctor is correct, attack! Take a pencil and stab the guy in the eye. Bite his nose off! Shove a French Dip in his ear, anything but being cowering pansy in the corner pissing yourself!
Wouldn’t the French Dip struggle its way out of your hand and surrender?
Sorry, sorry. I had to go for the “Cheese eating surrender monkey” joke. My bad.
Oh, I get it. I suppose I should have Americanized it more and made it something like; squirting a bottle of mustard in his ear.
Horsey sauce in the nostrils?
It would be nice to replace the current so-called “Black Man” with a real one. As for the rantings of this d-bag from GQ, realize this is the new “manly” in the eyes of women… As long as women think with their crotches, they’ll keep procreating with Magary beta-types. Loser men are portrayed as winners. Women are taught not to think. They believe the portrayal. The human genome turns to mush one one-night-stand at a time…
Nice hat? Are those the oregon lib protest dildos he’s sporting on the top of his melon protector?
So? Fall down….play dead…let the bad guy do whatever they want to with the corpse of you and your family.I just can’t wrap my head around this thought process.
Hey drew? Can you take this hammer and go smack that artillery round and see if it’s a good one for us bro.
Really? The actual title of the article contains the full, unaltered expletive? I thought the name of the magazine was GENTLEMAN’S Quarterly. Shame on them for allowing this. But now that I see what else is on the Home page, I guess a re-name is called for. Not many gentlemen there.
GQ…Yeah I stopped reading that rag when,…well wait…come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve really seriously read it…I really don’t cotton to mags with male models.
I wouldn’t expect anything less from the courage and logically challenged Drew Magary. He verbally struts around confident and proud with great attempts at providing intellectual content while both stretching his ability to articulate to their limits and injecting hate, malice, and non-sequitur statements in all that he says. Why anyone bothers reading his fact-free opinionated garbage is beyond me.
Carson’s statement on the shooter was right on point. If a shooter who you know is looking to shoot as many people as they can is coming for you, why would you try to cooperate with him? Cooperating is dying. Bum rush the guy. Sure, Carson’s Popeye’s statement, without clarification, seems to clash with his mass shooter statements, but they are fundamentally different scenarios. The best case scenario is the shooter’s parents would have instilled morals, values, and ethics into their child so he would not be shooting people at all. Since that failed and nobody in the mainstream media wants to mention it over sensationalizing guns, the better fallback is a person with morals, values, and ethics, who is armed, eliminates the threat in both scenarios.
Drew does not appear to be the sharpest knife in the drawer……
I am willing to bet any knife that’s sharper than a butter knife is far too dangerous for him to be around.
If the staff or this particular writer for GQ finds himself in a position of fight or flight.
He will probably be one of the 1st hit trying to run away.
Its his prerogative to go down in a heap.
Carson at least would stand up to an aggressor as Id like to believe most of us nonshepple here would. I know I would.
But in my personal case. Id never willingly set foot in a gun free anything. With the exception of once in a blue moon a Post Office. Some times one has no choice. Although I usually do go in armed anyway,while in my local PO. Id choose a privately owned shipping store to buy stamps first. I dont even use FedEx any more since its now posted No Guns.
If this GQ reporter doesnt believe in self defense. Thats his prerogative.
His views dont affect my life one bit, So screw him and GQ. GQ is good for lining a bird cage. Not much else.
Little Drew probably feels the same way about Todd Beemer, Mark Bingham, Tom Burnett and Jeremy Glick.
Youtube search “Stefan Molyneux r/K selection theory”. Watch all three parts and realize that there simply is no reasoning with those that disagree with us because it starts at the epigenetic level.
The GQ author is king of a rant-fest with no intelligent foundation whatsoever.
Self-defense is not a Right though correctly recognized and protected by the Forefathers. Self-defense is an innate human behavior to survive; fight or flight. It can’t be changed and disputing is not possible. When a human goes against or is unable to respond the outcome for those attacked is likely to not be good. Survival in these cases is pure luck. We see this when people huddle in corners or lay-down and play dead.
Why does everyone feel like they have to weigh in on politics, no matter how stupid or ignorant they are?
This is what happens when sheep presume to dictate the lives of lions. Allowing born slaves to have any say at all in matters relating to protection and violence is beyond unnatural, and the prime reason a “free” society cannot truly exist. You can’t give sheep an equal say and expect your republic to remain strong.
I wonder if his tantrum made him feel any better about himself? Not going to click to see it, BTW.
Why don’t we – the PotG – order a few thousand buttons that read:
“I won’t defend myself!”
We can pass them out in public places. Encourage people to stand-up and declare themselves to be willing victims!!
Why should we PotG have to undertake the heavy lifting of drawing and possibly shooting a rapist or armed robber? Let the eager victims stand in line first.
Nice
You do know some pro-2A types went around offering “This Is A Gun-Free Home” signs to some well-known grabbers to put in their front yards, right? And not surprisingly, the grabbers all declined the offer.
Perfect proof that it’s all a delusion, one the antis know is false but have to maintain in order to give reason to their insanity. They know deep down that they’re wrong and we’re right, but their emotional weakness and mental dysfunction won’t allow themselves to be strong enough to accept that they are responsible for their own protection.
I’m 100% against bum rushing a murder. Agreeing with Carson or any other candidate, politician, legislator, LEO or judge is paramount to agreeing to the condition by which the “the bum rush” is required.
NOTHING short of drawing your weapon and ending a murdering madman is acceptable.
The crossroad is to ignore an unjust law restricting a citizen from using the most effective tool for lawful self defense and gunfight your way to saving your life and perhaps others. or become a felon, not by an evil act, but by exercising a natural human right.
People can debate all they want, when conditions warrant, only those vested in the will, discipline and training required to engage evil will live. The ones betting their lives on a sign, legislative fiat are resigned to a fate that awaits them.
The French train terrorist righteous beat down by 3 American men and a British man are what Dr. Carson is talking about. These 4 men heard the sound of danger ran toward it empty handed and defeated evil.
In Israel it is illegal for civilians to have firearms. Israel is the GQ utopia, and a utopia for many anti-gun freedom progressives. Other people think Israel is a hell.
Here is another example of empty handed people doing what they could.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Patriarchs_massacre
“The Cave of the Patriarchs massacre, also known as Ibrahimi Mosque massacre or Hebron massacre,[1] was a shooting massacre carried out by American-Israeli Baruch Goldstein, also a member of the far-right Israeli Kach movement”
“The attack left 29 people dead and 125 wounded.[4] Goldstein was only stopped after he was overpowered and beaten to death by survivors”
In Israel left wing jews and right wing jews both agree civilians should not have guns. In America it seems only the left wing jews think civilians should be disarmed. Growing numbers of American’s disagree.
Dr. Carson inadvertently pointed out the result of zero tolerance policies that pushed students who defended themselves against bully attacks. These students grew up in a system that mandated that they allow bullies to beat them up if they wanted to avoid being punished.
The parents of these kids failed in their duty to undo the damage done by such policies.
My son had a few playstation days away from from for defending himself. As a result, no bully every tried to get one over on him more than once. Granted, he holds a 2nd degree black belt.
In the UCC attack, the only person who attempted to stop the murderer was a former soldier. Why? Being raised in Zero Tolerance brain washing.
Disagree, it wasn’t zero tolerance against a bully in a schoolyard. But the theory that not given a method of escape in clear and present danger, people lock up. Its the back of the brain stem aka million years of evolution that freezes so no movement may camouflage your presence. Yeah I know it doesn’t work unless your dressed as a desk or chair…its hard wired into your brain.
The reason the soldier aggressively took action is because he was trained to overcome the freeze. Another veteran had a weapon, but took the passive because authority stepped in and said stand fast. He was an Airman and perhaps did not have training or experience to overcome the authority directive.
Having a gun is only part of the solution. The will to overcome the fear of being wounded, to aggressively move forward and engage was what saved the students in the room.
Agreed. Additionally, the advice DHS and other arms of government put out regarding public threats is to:
1) Run. 2) Hide 3) Fight only as a last resort.
Untrained folks unaccustomed to being threatened generally freeze and cannot do any of the above.
Carson is not only quarterbacking the game after it’s ended, but doing it as someone who is not an actual QB, thus not expected to produce actual results.
When actually threatened (Popeye’s) he did not subdue the shooter, nor form a gang to rush the gunman. He redirected the gunman to a Popeye’s employee. 🙂
F*CK Drew Magary.
Worth Reading.
http://deadspin.com/drew-magary-won-chopped-last-night-and-it-s-a-goddamn-n-1696459525
This nincompoop actually writes for a magazine that has the word “gentleman” in its title? Behold the fruit of the Marxist progressive establishment.
GQ – 100% Metrosexuals and LGTBXYZ for decades before discovered elsewhere.
Does this Drew guy actually get paid to write this crap ? I now know why I have never read a copy of GQ magazine.
Your firearms won’t save your kids from the mandatory vaccines he said he will support. Good luck with giving the government The right to make your medical decisions for you and your family.
I am a fan of Dr. Carson, however, he will not get my vote. I am against mandatory vaccines as Pg2 pointed out, but also I read an article just a few weeks ago that claimed Carson stated that there is no need for semi-auto firearms in cities. Need to verify this once again, but it was enough for me to stay away from Carson at the voting booth. I will go with Cruz, or Trump before Carson.
Comments are closed.