Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judith Miller: "My Gun Control Fantasy" (Barf Alert)
Daily Beast ^ | 22 July 2012 | Judith Miller

Posted on 07/25/2012 9:56:20 AM PDT by DCBryan1

I have a dream to counter the nightmare of Aurora. I see four ex-presidents standing together, speaking truth to the American people. Here is what they would say:

"Our fellow Americans, we have come together not as Democrats or Republicans, but as men who have been privileged to lead this great country. We all treasure the constitution and the Second Amendment. We believe that Americans have the right to own guns. But that amendment does not entitle citizens to own combat weapons like the assault weapon that the shooter used to kill 12 and wound 58 more in a Colorado theater. The AR-15 assault rifle is a military style weapon designed to feature high-capacity ammunition magazines capable of firing up to 30 rounds of ammunition without reloading.....

(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; democrats; guncontrol; judithmiller; liberalfascism; rkba; shallnotbeinfringed; tyranny; youwillnotdisarmus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last
This is almost too painful to read, however, it is important to do so to counter the increasing ignorant screaming coming from the leftist elites to restrict our Rights.

it looks like Bill O'Reilley and Miller get their misinformation from the same source. Be sure to read and an your pro-RKBA comments and emails to both pinheads.

1 posted on 07/25/2012 9:56:33 AM PDT by DCBryan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Fifty Shades of Stupid.


2 posted on 07/25/2012 9:59:55 AM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Isn’t an AR-15 a semi auto and not an assault rifle?

Why take away the rights of millions of law abiding Americans because of the actions of some nut?

These anti-gun folk think with their hearts and not with their minds.

Criminals DO NOT care about gun laws. Gun control also makes their jobs safer and easier.

Geez.

-Rex


3 posted on 07/25/2012 10:00:22 AM PDT by RexBeach (Mr. Obama Can't Count.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
We believe that Americans have the right to own guns. BUT that amendment does not entitle citizens to own combat weapons

There is always a "BUT" with liberals.

What she means is "BUT we don't want them to have access to guns to resist our Tyranny when we make our Big moves."

Statist Dolt.

4 posted on 07/25/2012 10:00:26 AM PDT by KC_Lion (No more Grand Old Progressives! Vote Conservative-Libertarian-Tea Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

“Judith Miller” yet ANOTHER Leftist Yenta from that Feces-Hole of NYC!


5 posted on 07/25/2012 10:01:32 AM PDT by US Navy Vet (Go Packers! Go Rockies! Go Boston Bruins! See, I'm "Diverse"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion

A .45 Colt auto handdgun has been a combat weapon for decades.


6 posted on 07/25/2012 10:02:02 AM PDT by RexBeach (Mr. Obama Can't Count.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

***I see four ex-presidents standing together,***

speaking against semi auto rifles? Lemme guess.

Lincoln-single shot pistol.
Garfield- cheap revolver.
McKinley-cheap revolver.
Kennedy-5 shot bolt action rifle.

No semis involved.


7 posted on 07/25/2012 10:02:24 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (I LIKE ART! Click my name. See my web page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1; All
Judith Miller (born January 2, 1948) is a Pulitzer Prize-winning American journalist, formerly of the New York Times Washington bureau. Her coverage of Iraq's alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program both before and after the 2003 invasion generated much controversy. A number of stories she wrote while working for The New York Times later turned out to be inaccurate or simply false.
Wikipedia
8 posted on 07/25/2012 10:05:03 AM PDT by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

(Liberal Troll Speak) Hold it rite their!, What aboot your prescious Ronald Wilson Reagan (666) he waz shot two! (Lib Troll Speak off)


9 posted on 07/25/2012 10:05:39 AM PDT by KC_Lion (No more Grand Old Progressives! Vote Conservative-Libertarian-Tea Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
But that amendment does not entitle citizens to own combat weapons ...

About that, she is correct.

The Second Amendment doesn't say "The citizens shall have the right to keep and bear arms", it says "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

10 posted on 07/25/2012 10:05:45 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion

Hmmm.
Miller is historically illiterate. Under the Second Amendment the ONLY weapons protected are combat arms...


11 posted on 07/25/2012 10:07:06 AM PDT by Little Ray (AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Dude had his apartment wired for explosives.

I think thats illegal.

A guy who is prepared to kill mass numbers of innocents doesn’t care if its illegal or not.


12 posted on 07/25/2012 10:07:06 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
We all treasure the constitution and the Second Amendment. We believe that Americans have the right to own guns. But that amendment does not entitle citizens to own combat weapons like the assault weapon that the shooter used to kill 12 and wound 58 more in a Colorado theater.

_________________________________________

Hey putz, if you treasure the Constitution and the second amendment, you might notice it is “the right to bear arms” - not “own guns”

13 posted on 07/25/2012 10:07:39 AM PDT by KittenClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Is the Left capable of reasoning outside the world of “fantasy”?


14 posted on 07/25/2012 10:09:45 AM PDT by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

HA_HA, she cant even get her guy Obama to say that.


15 posted on 07/25/2012 10:09:51 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obam-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

I read the entire article...barely. Clearly she doesn’t understand a thing about the Bill of Rights, the so called AWB or what the role of the police is in regard to ‘protecting us’. It certainly was aptly titled as a fantasy.


16 posted on 07/25/2012 10:10:35 AM PDT by 556x45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Many a D.C. staffer’s Judith Miller fantasies were fulfilled, since my Senate lawyer friend told me she was known as an easy lay.


17 posted on 07/25/2012 10:11:34 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

If everyone was a helpless head in a jar, then no one would be able to murder anyone...


18 posted on 07/25/2012 10:11:34 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KittenClaws
if you treasure the Constitution and the second amendment, you might notice it is “the right to bear arms” - not “own guns”

Good point. Which means you have the right to not merely own a gun, but to carry it.

Had anyone in the theater been carrying a weapon, it would have had an entirely different outcome.

And if most people took their responsibility for self-defense seriously, the nut wouldn't have tried it in the first place, he'd know half the people in there would be packing.

19 posted on 07/25/2012 10:12:06 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Strange you should mention that, I, too, had always thought of her as a female 0’Pinhead...

Semper Amazing!
*****


20 posted on 07/25/2012 10:12:53 AM PDT by gunnyg ("A Constitution changed from Freedom, can never be restored; Liberty, once lost, is lost forever...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

When reading a liberal screed such as this, it is useful to remember that the largest mass murders of all time were committed by socialist governments.


21 posted on 07/25/2012 10:13:41 AM PDT by sima_yi ( Reporting live from the far North)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
Right to "bare arms"

Darn those libs will never git rid of Larry the Cable Guy.

22 posted on 07/25/2012 10:14:47 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Heh!

We're pausing commenting on this content for now, as we move The Daily Beast to our new commenting platform.

23 posted on 07/25/2012 10:15:06 AM PDT by Voice of Reason88 ( Freedom is never lost all at once - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion

***What aboot your prescious Ronald Wilson Reagan (666) he waz shot two!***

Wuzzn’t kilt. Neither was Teddy Roosevelt. FDR wuzzn’t but Antoine Cermak next to him wuz.


24 posted on 07/25/2012 10:15:43 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (I LIKE ART! Click my name. See my web page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KittenClaws

Hey putz, if you treasure the Constitution and the second amendment, you might notice it is “the right to bear arms” - not “own guns”

After guns are banned, knives are banned, after that they start bannning ideas.....

Then they start shipping people away who disagree with them....


25 posted on 07/25/2012 10:16:07 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

For the millionth time, the “Assault Weapons” ban did nothing to slow down gun crime or crime in general. In fact gun crime continued to decline after the ban expired.

That ban today would do nothing but temporarily ease the severely troubled minds of liberals at the expense of the liberty for the rest of us.


26 posted on 07/25/2012 10:17:40 AM PDT by Wildbill22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

If only we had “progressive” gun control laws like, say, Norway, mass murder couldn’t happen here, right?


27 posted on 07/25/2012 10:19:32 AM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Two of those Presidents are traitors and the other two are stealth RINOS...
Who knows WHAT they “believe”..

Examples of what americas people have sunk to..
We have NOW the givernment that reflects “the People”..

ELSE america would have chosen better on at least one of them.. they(WE) didn’t..


28 posted on 07/25/2012 10:19:32 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Here's how you take this away from her:

'We need to take control of such weapons to assure that they don't fall into the hands of criminals.'

So, Ms. Miller, to fix this, I take it you propose to give that control to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. this is the same agency that illegally FORCED gun dealers to sell thousands of military-grade weapons to drug cartels, weapons that killed hundreds of people.

I see.

Somehow, I think those weapons are safer in the hands of law abiding citizens.

29 posted on 07/25/2012 10:19:50 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Actually the 2nd Amendment DOES give us the right to own “combat weapons”.

The founders knew that to fight an effective war you would need arms that are the same if not superior to that of the army you are fighting. In the Revolutionary war we armed with muskets and with rifles. Rifles were superior to the muskets used by the British. That gave us an advantage due to the accuracy of the rifles used. We also used guerrilla tactics to fight and didn’t follow the standard “stand and fire” methods used by many armies of the time.

This writer is a total fool and has little knowledge of the history that lead up to the writing of the Constitution.

If any president did what he is saying then it would be a time to rise up and fight back against any government that would try to keep me from having the arms I need to fight against such tyrants.


30 posted on 07/25/2012 10:21:40 AM PDT by History Repeats (Drink plenty of TEA, but avoid the Koolaid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

I have a dream to counter liberal idiots.

I have a box with a red button on it. When I push it, liberals would be instantly banished to the other side of the universe.

It turns into a nightmare, though. Every time, I break the button by pushing it too hard.


31 posted on 07/25/2012 10:22:29 AM PDT by FLAMING DEATH (Are you better off than you were $4 trillion ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
"But that amendment does not entitle citizens to own combat weapons like the assault weapon..."

And where exactly is THAT stated in the text of the 2nd Amendment?

"The AR-15 assault rifle is a military style weapon..."

The Kentucky long rifle and the flintlock are also military style weapons. They were once used to to overthrow a tyrant many years ago. That's what they are for!

32 posted on 07/25/2012 10:22:29 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (As long a hundred of us remain alive we will never on any condition be brought under Obama's rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
"Judith Miller: "My Gun Control Fantasy""

Her fantasy would be better served with a cucumber.

What a buffoon.

33 posted on 07/25/2012 10:22:44 AM PDT by SERE_DOC ( “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” TJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

The 2nd Amendment isn’t just about owning guns. It is about Citizens being able to resist an oppressive government. Ownership of automatic and semiauto weapons are exactly what the 2nd Amendment stands for today, not hunting rifles and bows.


34 posted on 07/25/2012 10:23:17 AM PDT by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
My Fantasy includes 922 being removed from the USC altogether and RKBA being applied against the States as a "privilege and immunity" the "laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding"...

And then comes the chorus line of redheaded Rockettes...

35 posted on 07/25/2012 10:24:09 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
We all treasure the constitution and the Second Amendment.

They always lead off with this line.
Bullshit.
They've fought the Second Amendment every step of the way.

36 posted on 07/25/2012 10:24:59 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Ignorance is bliss and idiocy enobles I suppose.

This idiot and BOR both toss aroud the AWB as if it were a magical talisman. I know several folks who got their ARs and AKs via perfectly legal means during the tenure of the AWB. Their guns are not equipped with such evil features as flash hiders (aiiiieeee!) bayonet lugs (oh noes) or adjustable stocks (ohthehugemanatee!) Which is to say that the AWB was one of the most profoundly silly laws ever passed.

37 posted on 07/25/2012 10:25:28 AM PDT by jboot (OPSEC. It's a killjoy, but it may save your life someday.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

The 2nd Amendment isn’t just about owning guns. It is about Citizens being able to resist an oppressive government. Ownership of automatic and semiauto weapons are exactly what the 2nd Amendment stands for today, not hunting rifles and bows.

We might want to reevaluate our decisions that the Constitution protects gangs and gangland activity, or that free speech covers the saturation of violence and crime in entertainment. For that matter, most of pop culture is contrary to peaceful and secure civilization.


38 posted on 07/25/2012 10:31:11 AM PDT by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SERE_DOC
Her fantasy would be better served with a cucumber.

There are some things even a cucumber won't do ...

39 posted on 07/25/2012 10:31:11 AM PDT by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Another ignoranus heard from.


40 posted on 07/25/2012 10:32:39 AM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1; All

When are people on the left finally going to realize that the language of the 2nd Ammendment is clear in regards to what it was speaking about. The term used was “Arms.” This specifically implies military weaponry suitable for militia use.

The skirmish of 1775 at Lexington & Concord was when the British Army sent troops with the specific purpose to take away “arms” held by the colonists. What they were attempting to seize were “muskets.” At that time a “musket” was a smooth bore weapon that only had ONE use, and that was military. Because it was smoothbore it could be rapidly loaded and fired, but it was very inaccurate. That is why opposing armies lined up to fire at each other at close range.

A “musket” had NO civilian use. In fact civilians used “rifles” that were not smoothbore. A rifle has spiral groves in it that cause the bullet to rotate (like a thrown football) giving it accuracy. A rifle was suitable was hunting and not practical as a weapon because it could not be rapidly loaded, and after a few shots became so fouled with powder it could no longer be loaded without cleaning first.

The point is that a “rifle” was not a “military weapon” at that time and, by the tactics of the day, pretty much useless for conventional warfare. Whereas a “musket” was useless for hunting, and it only served to be used as a “military weapon.”

Now knowing that the drafters of the constitution were reacting to things they suffered under British rule. One can easily realize that when they wrote “right to keep and bear arms” they WERE refering to military type weapons...not hunting equipment.

Also, since a rationale provided in the ammendment, “A well regulated militia...” for this right (both an individual and collective one), it is extremely clear they were talking about weapons of warfare. The ONLY potential (I say potential because I don’t want to argue hardcase) restriction that could be “implied” was that the “arms” would be that suitable for an individual soldier. Therefore, an M16 type weapon would be protected, but I don’t think a howitzer (for individual use) would be...I don’t argue with folks about this because it causes too much discord.

The KEY to me is that an individual is guaranteed the right to keep and bear “military type” arms consistent with the military of the day. The purposes being for individual protection and when called upon by constitutionally allowed or mandated authority, for protection of community, state, & country.


41 posted on 07/25/2012 10:32:39 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
Those spouting this nonsense already know damn well what the Constitution says. They also know the historical precedent and everything else.

THEY DO NOT CARE.

They are pushing a narrative for their mindless sheep to swallow and regurgitate. Very little chance that any of their sycophants will ever entertain an individual thought of their ow and possibly jeopardize their handouts and freebies.

They want us out of the way so they can take complete control and this is a major stumbling block for them. They can try and pass anything they want...

I WILL NOT COMPLY.

42 posted on 07/25/2012 10:36:55 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

BTW, I sent a “pithier” comment like that to O’Reilly. We’ll see if he has the guts to run it.


43 posted on 07/25/2012 10:38:14 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Hey Judith!

How many Aurora victims were killed or wounded with buckshot from the Remington 870, pump-action shotgun, vs. the number killed or wounded from AR rounds?

Hint: The AR was the second weapon used, and jammed early.


44 posted on 07/25/2012 10:39:38 AM PDT by G Larry (I'm under no obligation to be a passive victim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

That’s the whole PROBLEM with liberals, Judith. You live in a DREAM WORLD where passing a law is presumed to solve the problem- whatever it may be. This makes it easy to go on your self-righteous way believing you have dealt with the issue of madmen with guns. Except you haven’t- you are not able to do so because it cannot be done.

Psssttt...since there have been weapons there have always been lunatics who on occasion go on murdering rampages killing people. This is part of the human condition lady and you can’t legislate it away. It’s awful and it’s shocking and there isn’t one damn law you can pass to change it.

My advice to you- go listen to the tape from MSNBC yesterday with the brother of one of the dead from Aurora. He’s an adult with an attitude of maturity you’d do well to emulate.


45 posted on 07/25/2012 10:42:15 AM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

Interestingly, she lists the Kennedy assassination as an example of mass shootings. What a weirdo.


46 posted on 07/25/2012 10:42:56 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

Dear libtard Judith,

Without the 2nd ammendment, you lose the 1st ammendment. Without those willing to protect their God given rights, you would not have the right to spew your garbage in a “free press.”

Idiots...


47 posted on 07/25/2012 10:49:14 AM PDT by CSM (Keeper of the Dave Ramsey Ping list. FReepmail me if you want your beeber stuned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1

As Krauthammer recently pointed out, the problem the left faces is that the “gun lobby” is the American people. And Americans won’t accept another “assault weapons” ban.
If they want a civil war, they can push a law through—like Obama’s fiat amnesty for illegals or his `Affordable Health Care’— and they can point the way, and we will point the guns.
It may be coming anyway but that would do it.


48 posted on 07/25/2012 10:50:01 AM PDT by tumblindice (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Yes Judith, we have known for a long time you live in a fantasy world.

Now why don't you go make yourself useful and write about your fantasy involving a Shetland pony and a German Shepard.

49 posted on 07/25/2012 10:51:55 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KittenClaws; Little Ray

” ...you might notice it is “the right to bear arms” - not “own guns”

KC - I’m no lawyer but I take “keep” to mean “own”.

“A well regulated militia...”

LR - You have a point. What other arms would a citizen militia need but those that are suitable for combat?


50 posted on 07/25/2012 10:56:14 AM PDT by beelzepug ("Blind obedience to arbitrary rules is a sign of mental illness")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson