2 years ago1,000+ Views
Ben Carson continues to grab our attention for all of the wrong reasons as of late.
Carson continued his pattern of controversial comments on Thursday when he spoke with Wolf Blitzer on CNN. Rather than keep things focused on his book, Carson shared his thoughts again on Gun Control and delivered a shocking comment about the Holocaust.
The Republican candidate claimed the Holocaust could have been prevented if the Jews had guns.
The quote was started in reference to a statement from Carson in the book “through a combination of removing guns and disseminating propaganda, the Nazis were able to carry out their evil intentions with relatively little resistance."
Carson then engaged in the segment and delivered his unforgettable opinion:
Blitzer “But just to clarify, if there had been no gun control laws in Europe at that time, would 6 million Jews have been slaughtered?”
Carson said “I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed. I’m telling you there is a reason these dictatorial people take guns first.
Carson is really taken things far with this comment.
It didn’t take long before the Anti-Defamation League responded to Dr. Carson’s inaccurate remarks:
“Ben Carson has a right to his views on gun control, but the notion that Hitler’s gun-control policy contributed to the Holocaust is historically inaccurate,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, National Director of the organization. “The small number of personal firearms available to Germany’s Jews in 1938 could in no way have stopped the totalitarian power of the Nazi German state.”

To blame guns as the major factor in the Holocaust is a stretch, don't you think?

View more comments
He keeps saying the worst things for his campaign. I know he is talented surgeon, but this dude needs a lesson or two in public speaking and compassion.
How is it not compassionate to simply say that if the Jews would have been able to fight back with guns, the devastation and mass murder could have been less? He is right. Just look back into history and you will see that when an evil person wants to take over, one of the first things they do is take away the people's ability to defend themselves.
I agree with what you are saying about the ability to defend yourself or take away someone resources is important in war. But the guns were in the hands of the government that turned on them @Rose314 ... I just don’t think it’s compassionate to make that comment after the fact, because it can harm those people who have family or relatives that were effected by the world war II. If that makes sense.
I can see what you are saying @nicolejb But if we don't talk about things like that, then we will forget and history will be repeated. The gun control issue is bigger than people's feelings.
I agree @Rose314! but we have no idea if that would’ve worked in history. maybe if he had brought up a specific example in history where giving citizen guns was valuable, I would’ve respected that more. but he brought up a sensitive issue, without examples and data to back it up. and that’s not ok in my opinion.