I'm concerned that when he was asked about "places like Detroit, where they are mowing people down with AK47's" that he didn't call them on that, since no such event has ever occurred.

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.

The 'brother's keeper' WAS the religious belief I was mentioning. ? (Knowing better what's good for someone else than they do..IS being a brother's keeper. Did you miss that part?)

Which is actually a corrupt interpreting of the passage anyway. It's not what is meant by it at all, but like the libs screaming "racist", this becomes the canard of atheists.

The martial law thing has been a concern of mine since the current "resident" took the oath the first time. Then proceeded to begin the unraveling of the Constitution by the office appointments, exec orders, etc. Not to mention the arming of the various executive agencies to the hilt. Doesn't look good for the citizens, in my mind.

If he is, why the stance on limiting the rights of citizens in urban areas? IF he feels that way, then how does he justify NOT limiting freedoms on other things, like NSA info gathering or the war on drugs?

yes, he has become a target and he is facing that head on and not shutting up. very admirable

Brother's keeper crap. You shouldn't have a gun because someone might steal it...it's for your own good. That's what I'm referring to.

When the definitions of words are altered, changed, or deliberately turned into their opposite meaning, intelligent discourse becomes impossible. The unwary are left intellectually disarmed against any slick, fast talking charlatan who merely looks good while spouting his twisted evil ideas.

I have never met a more politically unenlightened group of professionals than doctors. The majority of our family and many of our friends are doctors and where they have to apply reason and logic in their field, they completely leave at the office when they think about political and policy oriented discussions. The Pauls are unique.
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.

Has anyone else noticed how many Medical doctors have been gaining gravitas in political circles, rather than lawyers. What's up with that?

As to Carson, he worries me because he's just so caring. His influence against Obamacare is welcoming, though.

"I truly believe in Second Amendment rights," Carson said. "I would never advocate anything to interfere with Second Amendment rights; however, I do think we have to be intelligent." Anytime I hear the the phrase "however I do think we have to be intelligent," I think the speaker means confiscation.

You caught that too? Call me paranoid, but to me it sounds like someone leading into "I won't restrict or opress your right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by the second amendemnt, except for the following, because it's just common sense that "everybody" shouldn't have firearms... only those deemed to have earned that privilege... and proved to the government they're safe enough to have that privilege." I think we're there already.

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.

As long as he doesn't impose his religious views on others it really doesn't matter.

I also notice the doctor trend. Obamacare has really pissed them off as well as the whole medical industry where administrators get paid more than the actual practitioners. Doctors continuously see less and less money as their fees get cut and split among managed care firms and PPOs however they are expected to see more and more patients. Obamacare is asking them to see patients that they cannot even confirm coverage for since the implementation has been so screwed up. Essentially docs know they will be providing services for a lot more people and getting paid a lot less or not at all. As far as professionals go, they are extremely regulated on what they can and cannot do and are told by the government what they will get paid per service, if you had to deal with that day in and day out you would be pretty pissed off too.

The jury is still out on him in my opinion. He appears to have changed his 2nd Amendment stance, but I think his first comments about where you live is what he truly believes.

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.

He doesn't wish to. He just is speaking out against the transgressions against the constitution, and I must say, he's doing so because these things need to be said. He is not shrinking from speaking out against a tyrannical government, and has been scrutinized by the IRS as a direct result. That has not stopped him from continuing to speak out, and it's something I find admirable, as opposed to remaining silent because that's what this administration wants. Cowed silence.

Not true. He's quite vocal about our liberties, and that they are sacred, and should be defended at all costs. He's very open about it. Read America the Beautiful by him, and you will see how vehemently opposed to infringements of our liberties he is.

He is honest and admits if he's in error. I believe his earlier held opinions about guns come from having grown up in two violent urban neighborhoods, and witnessing gang related killings. He does however recognize that the second amendment applies to all, and that legal gun owners are being targeted, and it needs to be stopped before we are all stripped of our firearms. What has become the thing that has gotten me irritated throughout all of the ignorant spoutings, is when people say to ban semi-automatic weapons. Well, they all are. Full auto are not legal. Semi-automatics, when anyone ever bothers to learn, are all firearms which require one to pull the trigger each time you want to fire. And the whole "assault weapon" thing? Don't get me started! Ugh!

That's true. He 's new at this. But I 'm not in politics and thousands of others aren 't as well and they have put alot of thought in it...

I think he doesn 't start from the position of owning himself. If you start from a place of obligation then it 's easier to to nip at freedoms. His statements about firearm restrictions in urban areas is straight forward "for the good of society "
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