Ken Berwitz
Republican presidential candidate BenCarson has apparently ignited a major firestorm, by suggesting that the victimsof chris harper mercer\’s massacre at Upqua Community College – 9 dead, 7 othersinjured – could have done more to save themselves.
Excerpted from Curtis Houck\’s blog atnewsbusters.org:
ABC\’s World News Tonight anchor David Muir declaredthat the retired neurosurgeon was “not backing down from his commentsabout that massacre at a community college in Oregon, saying he wouldn\’t juststand there” while GOP campaign correspondent Tom Llamas characterizedCarson as “standing firmly behind his comments suggesting the victims inthe Oregon campus massacre could have done more.”
Following the heated interview on CBS This Morning,correspondent Julianna Goldman reported on the CBS Evening News that Carson”doubled down” on the morning show by “repeating the suggestionthat victims of last week\’s mass shooting at an Oregon community college couldhave done more to protect themselves.”
Having seen one of these reports, thesense it gave me (and, I suspect, the others would have as well) is that Carson was being positioned as aninsensitive, compassionless idiot who blames the victims for being victims.
In this regard, maybe it would be a goodidea to see what Dr. Carson actually said:
“Not only would I probably not cooperate withhim, 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\'”
Let\’s start by noting that Carson saidnothing accusatory about the victims. He said what he would have doneunder the same circumstances. So the premise of media\’s attacks on hiscomments – and, make no mistake, they were meant as attacks, is false.
But what about what he did say? Does it make him some kind oflunatic?
Before we decide, let\’s compare.
-Carson\’s idea: They rush theshooter, knowing that he might get a shot or two off, which might injure orkill whomever he hit, but it would end right there with everyone else safe andthe shooter unable to continue. End-result: one or two dead orinjured, everyone else safe.
-What happened: They sat, immobile, while the shooter, unchallenged, asked them their religion and, one byone, either killed or injured them based on their answers. End result: 9 dead, 7 injured, no one safe.
Which do you think is a better result?
If the victims could go back in time andeither do what Carson suggested or what they did, which do you think they\’dchoose?
Now: what do you conclude from this? That Ben Carson is a compassionless idiot, or that he had a point; a veryvalid one?
Your call.
