I'm not sure Andre Carson has my interests covered. Response from a letter...

[seedubs1]

I like how it really seems like he cares about his constituents and actually reads and responds to them

Will vote for again

 

[Newg]

lol, I was trying to remember what ridiculous LE he was. I love it when excise police call themselves cops. Just after I came back from overseas, my wife introduced me to a massive douchebag which was Excise Police. He really compared what he does to what the troops overseas did. I also had been drinking.... Looked him right in the eyes and told him I was needed immediately somewhere the wasn't so deep.

I'm going to highjack this old thread real quick:
My dad is a 30 year veteran of the Indiana State Excise Police. He's now retired. He called himself a cop. While serving as a "ridiculous LE" he lost an eye when a drunk resisted arrest and punched him. Pieces of his eyeglasses went into his eyeball. When I say "lost it" I mean it's gone. Replaced by a glass one. I see the LEO-@ss kissing that is typically found on INGO doesn't extend to every form of cop. I know, I know, raiding bars full of drunks and writing tickets is not nearly as high risk as driving around in a squad car and writing tickets like real cops do.

Back on topic:
On a related note, my dad was Andre and Sam's [the other Carson who was Excise] superior at the end of his career. It didn't always go well. I'll end that story there...

 

[Henry]

Nothing with a Carson does go well.

 

[88GT]

Nothing with a Carson does go well.

Except a liquor store sale.

 

[gatorindy]

Recent news interview was Disgusting

Wish I had wrote down the date/time and radio station. But heard him say we needed to fund some program(again didn't write it down) Said we should cut back on Military Spending to come up with the money. Does he not watch the same news we watch? Or Men and Women need to have the best systems out there. Between ISIS, Russia and China we need to be ready should there be a need!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Except a liquor store sale.

It's a wrap, shut it down, boys.

88 just won the Internet with that one.

 

[actaeon277]

Wish I had wrote down the date/time and radio station. But heard him say we needed to fund some program(again didn't write it down) Said we should cut back on Military Spending to come up with the money. Does he not watch the same news we watch? Or Men and Women need to have the best systems out there. Between ISIS, Russia and China we need to be ready should there be a need!

The military's always the first cut, and the hardest.
Sometimes it's for a reason.
Sometimes it's because it's easier than cutting everyone's pet project.
Everyone wants to cut the budget, just not THEIR part of the budget.

 

[Bill of Rights]

The military's always the first cut, and the hardest.
Sometimes it's for a reason.
Sometimes it's because it's easier than cutting everyone's pet project.
Everyone wants to cut the budget, just not THEIR part of the budget.

Yep. That's the federal "first cut", just like at the city level, it's always police and fire protection that are first threatened. The mayor rarely volunteers to decrease his own compensation, likewise city council members.

 

[Thor]

Yep. That's the federal "first cut", just like at the city level, it's always police and fire protection that are first threatened. The mayor rarely volunteers to decrease his own compensation, likewise city council members.

Shack. It's the Firemen first policy. Make the cuts for political effect. It is also why the DoD has become the Department of Everything but Defense. It's the dept of social engineering, green energy, community help, whatever, but defense? You don't need those A10s son, float another hospital ship.

 

[Dim Mak]

He's worthless and a waste of space like the majority of his family is.

 

[chipbennett]

However, the United States has an unacceptably high level of gun crime. I believe that strong restrictions must be enacted to protect both the public and the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.

Andre, you represent my State now, so I get to participate in holding you accountable for saying things like this.

You co-sponsored this anti-second amendment garbage:
Bill Summary & Status - 113th Congress (2013 - 2014) - H.RES.318 - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

SUMMARY AS OF:
7/25/2013--Introduced.Expresses support for the President's Plan to Reduce Gun Violence.
Urges: (1) Congress to enact legislation based on the President's recommendations to reduce gun violence, (2) state legislatures to reject proposed stand-your-ground legislation, and (3) states to repeal enacted stand-your-ground laws.
Condemns: (1) gun violence, (2) relevant parties for their roles in obstructing the ability of communities to be safe from gun violence and in proposing stand-your-ground legislation and similar legislation that compromises public safety and the integrity of the prosecutorial system, and (3) all efforts to weaken gun laws and proposals that stand in the way of comprehensive gun law reform.

So, the "strong restrictions" you favor are the ones that impact the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against armed criminals? You think that will protect the public? How, exactly?

Also, how does "comprehensive gun law reform" respect the natural, constitutionally protected rights of law-abiding citizens, much less actually reduce gun crime?

Here, you speak on the floor of the House about gun violence in Indianapolis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0oDYV8K3Ho

You claim that "violence [is] on the rise" in Indianapolis, but crime statistics do not support that claim. You ask for laws that will prevent more of such crime - but laws do not prevent crime. Laws merely define acts as criminal, and provide State-sanctioned consequences for those acts.

You lament the death of officer Perry Renn, but fail to mention that his murderer violated existing laws in killing officer Renn - and not only that, but the man who shot officer Renn had an extensive history of run-ins with police. Perhaps the problem isn't with existing laws or a lack of "restrictions" on the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, but rather a lack of sufficient enforcement for breaking existing laws? Most gun crime is committed by repeat felony offenders - many, if not most, of whom are involved in gangs and/or drugs. What "restrictions" do you seek to impose on such people, in order to reduce gun crime in Indianapolis? Or is it only the law-abiding upon whom you wish to impose "restrictions" and "comprehensive gun control reform"?

 

[Bollorollo]

^^^ AMEN! ^^^