SAN JOSE, Calif., Oct. 10, 2015 – During his run to gain the GOP nomination for president of the United States of America, Dr. Ben Carson is continuing to rile the politically correct apologists and propagandists of the mainstream media. Not long after the tragedy of the shooting at the Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, Dr. Carson was asked how he would have handled the situation of the shooter’s being in the classroom.
He basically stated that he would encourage the trapped students to storm the gunman, and even if he lost his life, the many would have been able to more easily limit the carnage. The media promptly questioned the wisdom of his words.
Such questions and outright criticism of Carson’s statement reveals much about the media while at the same time, they show what kind of a man the good doctor happens to be. Just the fact that he is attempting to earn the nomination of the Republican Party to run for POTUS also demonstrates what kind of character he possesses.
His character could be considered heroic by many people seasoned by life. Yet, today in America, there are many who recognize only the heroes who have leapt from the pages of comic books and who have some super power. Is it possible heroes could actually be normal people who would step forward to help others at the cost of their lives?
A superficial dissection of Carson’s words would determine that he must be out of his mind for suggesting what he would do to our young people. After all, gun-free zones should be enough to protect our innocent and defenseless students on campuses all across the nation. And President Obama will come to the rescue with more and stricter gun control laws — right?
We don’t need no heroes…
Carson’s expression of his willingness to sacrifice himself for others flies in the face of political correctness. His radical conception of the right of self-defense is contrary to what students on campuses are taught: run and hide, find something (if possible) to protect oneself.
Yet, when trapped inside a closed room with a maniac, with no place to run or hide, politically correct campus etiquette runs counter to simple common sense. Sadly, the ones who run the risk of paying with their lives in such situations are the ones who obey the law and comply with the rules while lawless gunmen invade the gun-free zones with guns blazing. A shooter intent on carrying out violence against others has already determined with twisted mind to violate more laws than simply carrying a loaded gun into an area that prohibits guns. A crazy, intent on taking out as many victims as possible in the process of committing suicide, is not going to be worried about following any rules.
In echoing this sentiment, William Jacobson, a professor at Cornell University, recently posted an op-ed for USA Today that revealed an interesting comparative: “In other mass shootings, the shooters’ motivations have varied, from racism to religion to anti-religion,” so “there has not been a single common theme, except for one.”
Jacobson says that a common denominator of the mass shootings is the fact that most of them have taken place in gun-free zones where firearms were legally banned. It is ridiculous that with all the heightened and high-tech security precautions protecting American’s “valuable” assets, the best the government can come up with is the ridiculous notion that a sign stating “Gun-Free Zone” will spare America’s most precious of assets: the lives of our young people.
A deeper consideration of Carson’s words would demonstrate that his words make a lot of sense for others caught in such dangerous circumstances. He seems to be looking at such deadly situations with his usual common sense approach: As greater numbers can provide greater safety to greater numbers, the odds are against a lone gunman.
Additionally, while it may be politically correct to establish gun-free zones throughout the nation, it would only empower those who view such zones as shooting galleries with real live targets. However, if a potential shooter is not so certain of having a bunch of cooperative victims because they may just rush him to defend one another, insidious plans may never materialize.
Dr. Carson’s personal willingness for a physical confrontation with a shooter would require great courage, however, and fear of losing one’s life would likely inhibit such drastic action by many. So Dr. Carson’s words reflect a willingness for personal sacrifice. The external threat would most likely trigger an internal confrontation within each individual on a couple of levels.
First, a person in such a dire situation would have to be in control of the natural instinct to flee or fight; and second, if the choice was to fight, it would require the suppression of the fear of dying; and in the process the victim would have to weigh the value of self against the effort of sacrificing oneself for the survival of others.
Dr. Carson, as a doctor, has already lived a good portion of his life saving lives, so it may be his professional instincts that would kick in under such a threat. It is also true that the good doctor is a father, and a good parent will undoubtedly exhibit willingness to offer oneself for the sake of the children. Nevertheless, Benjamin Solomon Carson is a good Christian, and as a good Christian, he knows well the example that Jesus Christ left for those who became followers.
Personal sacrifice is at the heart of his effort to live for the sake of others, and sacrificing one’s life for the sake of friends was viewed as the greatest gift one could offer.
It is likely that more often than not in the future, as the world becomes increasingly hostile, America will not be spared such atrocious hostilities. Signs or laws usually do not deter the lawless. It may very well be that Christian courage or faith-based values respecting human life will be necessary to prevent humanity from falling into chaos and anarchy.
In light of that very probable reality, more and more people should heed Dr. Carson’s “controversial” words and consider whether they would be willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of others. It seems that this is exactly what our fathers and mothers did for us, as their parents did for them, as the founding generation did in creating the United States of America. It just may be our turn.