It’s a rare Sunday when I agree with Leonard Pitts Jr. His column, “And now, an ode to guns” (CDT, 10/18), definitely wasn’t one of them.
He’s obviously misinterpreted Dr. Ben Carson’s statements. Carson did not say that there never could have been a Holocaust if the Jews had been armed. Carson’s statement on CNN was, “I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed.”
The words “greatly diminished” are key here. How could Pitts not understand such plain English? It’s tough to round people up when there’s a gun behind each door.
Also. Carson did not blame the victims of the shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, instead he plainly stated what he would do.
His words, “I would not just stand there and let them shoot me,” are pretty easy to understand. Actually, it’s good advice. And what the anti-gun crowd fails to tell you is that there are numerous instances of armed citizens either stopping or lessening the severity of attacks such as this one.
People should remember that when the police (with guns) showed up at the UCC campus and engaged the shooter, the incident ended. A security guard (without a gun) on duty was of little help. An armed citizen might have made a difference.
Leonard Pitts Jr. doesn’t get it. Hopefully, you do!
Alan C. Scott