Anti-gun zealot Sandra Bernhard asks Obama to fight NRA over 'automatic weapons'

Perpetually angry D-list comedian Sandra Bernhard joined other ghoulish celeb leftists Tuesday in using the Aurora tragedy to score points for the gun control movement. More specifically, she’s asking Obama to “reinstate gun control laws over automatic weapons.”

Really, Sandra? We didn’t realize the 1934 Firearms Act had been overturned. Try again, genius.

The fully automatic weapons that gun controllers use to push this agenda have been heavily regulated by the federal government since 1934 and not produced for civilian sale since 1986.  Don’t take my word for it – here’s Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center: “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons-anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun-can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”

For the record, the Aurora shooter didn’t use automatic weapons to carry out his sickening crime. The New York Times reports that the gunman used “a semiautomatic variation of the military’s M-16 rifle, a pump-action 12-gauge shotgun and at least one .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol.”

But facts mean nothing to gun ban zealots like Bernhard. Gun-grabbers refuse to debate the merits of keeping semi-automatic weapons available to law-abiding citizens. Instead, they use inflated scaretistics, blatantly false assertions and tragedies like the Aurora shooting to instill fear that violent criminals are strolling out of the local Bass Pro with arsenals of automatic weapons.

They willfully ignore the history of citizens armed with concealed weapons saving lives in Colorado.

Many Coloradans will remember that the mass shooting in Colorado Springs at New Life Church in 2007 was stopped by a citizen hero, Jeanne Assam, because she was armed and shot back — saving hundreds of lives.

And of course, they ignore the countless armed women empowered to protect themselves and their families from violent criminals when law enforcement couldn’t or wouldn’t help.

But of course, we already know how vile misogynist Sandra Bernhard feels about empowered gun-toting women like Sarah Palin: she’d like to see them “gang-raped” by her “big black brothers.”

  • TugboatPhil

    Good gravy!! Please don’t post that picture again!

    Ms Bernhard is beyond being just a dufus, she is a full-fledged douchfus.

  • Hello Jerry (D)

    No wonder she can’t get a man.

    • Rags Vnvmc

      She is a man!!!!!!

    • Rick Hall

      She doesn’t want or need a man. She’s a lesbian.

      • vphilly

        It’s because that fugly face of hers makes the men run away screaming.

    • Madcat151

      She claims its because shes a lesbian. I tend to think its more because she looks and talks like a digusting pervert!

  • Heather Shiflet-Garnes

    This woman is an idiot…as are most of the Hollywood elite that like to barf up their ridiculous opinions…

    • larry

      This pathetic dyke drug addict isn’t an “elite” anything..

  • FGCU_James

    Dear God in Heaven, please purge that picture from my memory. I know I have sinned, but this punishment is too great.

  • BrotherWill

    So what if he had a fully automatic weapon. Its irrelevant. If there were more people who carried, say 4 or 5 in that theater, there would probably be a lot more of them alive today.

    • erichop

      Actually there is better chance that anyone returning fire would have hit an innocent bystander or nothing at all. Very few people have the nerves, courage and quick thinking to accurately use a firearm under these conditions. Add to that the fact the shooter was wearing body armor and the chances are even slimmer that anyone would have stopped him. I’m not anti gun I’m pro reality.

      • Madcat151

        people who take the time to get conceal carry know how to hit wtf they are aiming at. Get your head outa yer backside liberal!

        • erichop

          I’ll tell you the same thing I told the other poser/hero wannabe.
          After a lifetime of hunting and some wonderful times in Bosnia back in the nineties I’m pretty sure I know what I’m talking about and probably faster than you, jackass. Shooting at the range under controlled conditions is not the same thing. Trained police officers often miss with more rounds than connect with a target in real life situations. Which is what this was, a real life situation not some hero fantasy that you have with your Glock or whatever weapon you are using to compensate for your deficiencies.

          • LogicalAnswer

            You can not be serious.

          • Heather Thornton Wiles

            Please read this article. Kind of verifies what erichop is trying to convey in his posts.
            The common concealed weapons carrier does not get the training to react in these kinds of situations.

          • LogicalAnswer

            You should just stop now. You’re starting to look foolish. That “expert” was misinformed about what ole Jimmy was wearing, just like you are. Here’s an article for YOU, by the way. James Holmes was not wearing body armor as your article so eloquently flubs. That thing wouldn’t even stop your garden variety steak knife.

          • Chere Ryan Anderson

            Neither do the ones that want to do harm to you, hmmmm carry weapon or be a victim? I take carry concealed weapon!

      • LogicalAnswer

        We’re not talking about handing random people a gun as they go into the place and say, “Here, if shit goes down, use this.” People who carry concealed know their weapons and are proficient with them. We know the laws, and are practiced and prepared enough with our weapons to protect ourselves and one another. If we weren’t then why would we need the gun to begin with? Just because YOU don’t “have the nerves, courage and quick thinking to accurately use a firearm under these conditions” doesn’t mean we don’t either. Pansy. There’s some “reality” for ya.

        • erichop

          After a lifetime of hunting and some wonderful times in Bosnia back in the nineties I’m pretty sure I know what I’m talking about and probably faster than you, jackass. Shooting at the range under controlled conditions is not the same thing. Trained police officers often miss with more rounds than connect with a target in real life situations. Which is what this was, a real life situation not some hero fantasy that you have with your Glock or whatever weapon you are using to compensate for your deficiencies.

          • Madcat151

            Omg your an idiot! Everyone and his dog knows that shooting under stress is much differant! You MORON!
            Oh and thanks for your FAKE service to the country ya mental defect!

          • erichop

            Right so everyone and his dog should know that hitting a target in a smoke filled room while others are screaming and running is much more difficult than hitting a paper target at the range and innocent people could have been hit by that return fire.
            So because I disagree with you then I didn’t serve our country? That doesn’t seem like a reasonable assumption nor does your assertion that I am somehow mentally defective.
            Where were you during the Bosnian conflict, still wet behind the ears I imagine.

          • LogicalAnswer

            Hey Eric. What was your role in the Bosnian conflict? I don’t mean to undermine your service because I respect you for it and I thank you for making the sacrifice.. but not many trigger pullers were involved in that conflict. Mostly Army SF.. and I know a couple of them that were in Bosnia during that conflict. Those guys would NEVER be self-righteous about what they did and throw it in somebody’s face like you are on here. Were you a cook?

          • Heather Thornton Wiles

            Quite a funny comment from someone who doesn’t know how to spell. What was YOUR contribution to the freedom and safety of this country? It certainly hasn’t been your education, nor tolerance for common sense.

          • PennyRobinsonFanClub

            Oh dear, someone made a typo on Teh Intertoobz! That obviously invalidates his entire argument!

          • LogicalAnswer

            Ok so I misunderstood your position entirely. You’re not saying armed civilians are incompetent and dangerous because you are ignorant of how capable many of them are, but because you are a holier-than-thou jerk who thinks YOU’RE the only one capable. Copy.
            Most of the armed citizens I know are better with their weapons than the cops I know. So that’s not a good example. Cops are law enforcement first, shooters after. The guys I compete with would destroy police qualifications. I understand there are pressures involved and stressful conditions make people do things they normally wouldn’t and vice versa. Common sense. But to say that it would be better for no one there to have returned fire bc they might miss or hit a bystander is completely ridiculous.
            For the record, I hate Glocks.

          • erichop

            First I would never take a weapon to a theater, I don’t carry in public. I’m sure competitive shooters are very accurate and if the guys you know were there maybe a different story. The general population I see at the Rod and Gun Club are neither accurate or strike me as the types who could keep it together under the stress of being shot at. Ever been shot at? It tends to get your adrenaline pumping and hands shaking if you’ve never experienced it before.
            Not a fan of the Glocks either, I have a nice older .380.
            Just another point, when Gabriel Giffords was shot in AZ there was someone about 100 feet away with a concealed handgun. He never got it out of the holster until the whole thing was over and shooter had been tackeld by unarmed people while reloading.

          • Valentine Lucien Thorne

            Although you are very knowledgeable about weapons, accuracy, type of weapons, and how people “may” act in a fight or flight situation. That doesn’t apply to everyone. Not everyone is built to deal with that situation, that is true. But to suggest that every person rather do do nothing and watch their fellow man or woman or child take hit after hit and not want to do something is absurd. Common sense must come first, opportunity comes second, courage is third, Action is last. I am not suggesting that everyone should carry a weapon with them. But if that person is to carry it, they need to condition themselves to brace that kind of situation, if it ever does occur.

          • Heather Thornton Wiles

            But to suggest that if some people had been card carrying, concealed weapons toting patrons, the rampage could have been cut short, is a HIGHLY UNLIKELY scenario. MAYBE if a Navy Seal or Army Ranger was in attendance that night, with a concealed weapon, BUT, that is still highly unlikely, as the shooter was in full body armor and released some gas before he started shooting. The “right” is trying to spin it as “if more people were allowed to carry guns” that this tragedy could have been cut short, when that’s not a realistic thought at all. They are trying to say that the Liberal Left are trying to use this tragedy as a catalyst to further gun control legislation, when the conservative right is really doing just that, to further their fight for no gun controls.

          • LouGots

            All real shooters disdain the Glock. Bad trigger, bad grip. Only hits count, and a fat magazine just means more misses. It doesn’t point right.

            Some LEO organizations train on my club’s ranges and they invited us to enter a team in a practical match they were holding. Barriers, weak hand, holsters, changing mags, running forward–all that rah, rah stuff. Our five “mature” Bullseye shooters swept it. Only hits count.

        • Heather Thornton Wiles

          And have you ever been in a real life or death situation to know how you would handle the pressure and be able to accurately use your firearm? Or many of the people who have a concealed weapon permit? You aren’t given a test like the police have to take, going through an obstacle course to see how you accurately judge the enemy and shoot effectively, nor do you know how your body will react to the chemicals in your body that would be released in such a stressful situation, effecting how you think and react. You are very unrealistic of how the average gun toting American would act in a given situation.

          • LogicalAnswer

            Thank God, I have never had to use my weapon to do harm to another human. But I would, if forced to protect my wife, daughter, or myself so that I could be with them one more day. I guarantee it.
            And since you are questioning my character and competency, I feel like I need to defend myself and tell you a little about who I am. I’m no Navy Seal of Army SF or any kind of soldier for that matter, and I’m no hero. I’m just a regular guy. But I’m not a little boy as you are insinuating either.
            I grew up shooting nearly every day of my life. Dozens of different types of weapons hunting many different types of animals in many terrains and conditions.
            I fought mixed martial arts for about four years. Yes thats cage fighting and No I’m not one of these douche bags walking around in Affliction shirts. I am an athlete. It is not, but it feels like (and you must train for) a “life or death” fight.
            I shoot competitively. The stages we shoot are more challenging than police quals, and we must negotiate obstacles and avoid shooting non-threat targets in the process.
            I HAVE been in a life or death situation before and I was unarmed and I told myself that day I would never let it happen again. I was in a grocery store when a gunman came in and started shooting. Luckily, the dumb shit was too bad a shot to hit anybody and only scared the cashier he was robbing. Scared and panicked are too different things. I felt the fear, but not the panic. Had I been armed, I could have neutralized the shooter. Had someone been hurt, I would have had to live with letting it happen. That’s my personality. You are right. SOME people can’t handle it. Those people don’t usually carry guns.
            YOU can’t tell ME I’m being unrealistic about something I know more about than you do. Do you carry a gun? How many people do you know that carry a gun? How many times have you gone to a gun range and shot with people that carry a gun? You getting my point here? You liberals love to think you’re smarter than everyone else. Hell, I’m not going to argue with you about which vegan burger is the best because, guess what, I don’t know. So YOU don’t tell ME what the “average gun toting American” would or wouldn’t do, because I am one. Boom.

          • LogicalAnswer

            Sorry, that got kind of long winded. It’s kind of a big deal to me when a complete stranger makes a judgment on my character.

          • PennyRobinsonFanClub

            Didn’t you read her post? Her Daddy used to go hunting or something, so she’s an expert.

          • PennyRobinsonFanClub

            There are also many CCs who HAVE undergone stress/”real life” situation training and is exactly such a regimen.

            Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Oh, I’m sure you are aware that -BY SETTLED LAW- the police actually have no duty to protect you or stop a crime? Look it up.

          • Dennis M OLeary

            heather.. go get your GED and come back then

          • LaSantaHermandad

            There are tactical shooting courses that one can take that emphasize the points you made. THere IS a large difference between taking cover in your home and ambushing a thug who has entered your home with robbery, rape and murder in what might be loosely called a mind and having to react to a situation where a gun toting criminal already has psychological control over a group of terrified individuals.
            Anyone who has a Concealed Carry permit should definitely take these courses.
            Just curious. Do you have any experience with firearms?

          • LaSantaHermandad

            There are tactical shooting courses that one can take that emphasize the points you made. THere IS a large difference between taking cover in your home and ambushing a thug who has entered your home with robbery, rape and murder in what might be loosely called a mind and having to react to a situation where a gun toting criminal already has psychological control over a group of terrified individuals.
            Anyone who has a Concealed Carry permit should definitely take these courses.
            Just curious. Do you have any experience with firearms?

      • Marty Motes

        Even wearing body armor, a bullet to the chest, back, legs, arms or pretty much any other part of the body is going to incapacitate you. I’ve seen soldiers get sit square in the chest while wearing balistic plates and it still knocks them right on their butt and they can’t move for a short period. Even if it didn’t stop him, it would give people a little more time to escape.

        • NWFL Conservative

          I am living proof of that. I got hit in my front plate with an AK round and it was like getting smacked in the chest with a Sammy Sosa homerun swing. But I did get right back up knowing that I was not going to bleed to death.

        • LouGots

          What body armor was that?

        • Romans 8:39

          You beat me to it Marty, people would have had extra time to escape and the loss of life would have and could have been less.

        • sdevos68

          It would have also given more people time to corral him or get second, third, 12th shots off on soft tissue that wasn’t armed.

      • LouGots

        The “body armor” fable was one more piece of Grabber deception. No armor, just a fancy shooting vest with a lot of pockets. Be very careful of any bit of information which seems to support the gun-grabber cause: Grabbers lie all the time. They just make stuff up.

        This lie is being spun to counteract the possibility of armed citizen resistance.

        Have we heard anything about the “tear gas?” None of the victims/hostages has reported tear gas symptoms that I am aware of. Might have been a smoke bomb, might be more Grabber deception.

        That’s the problem. Once the anti-gun myths start flying it’s very hard to tell what really did happen.

        • erichop

          I just heard form the initial reports (on all networks and news papers not from gun grabbers) that he was wearing armor, ballistic knee pads and throat protector. I have heard smoke bomb not tear gas but some people near the canister where treated for chemical exposure. I find the media vultures too nauseating to watch so I haven’t been keeping up with coverage.
          I’m not here to be anti gun, I have a nice little collection that isn’t going anywhere. I questioned the opinion that armed people in the theater would have been a plus and i still do.

          • Valentine Lucien Thorne

            Well, to be fair and honest. You can’t trust the news most of the time. Ever heard of “sensationalism.” The news and Newspapers use that all the time to make article more eye-catching and/or spin the truth till it looks like whatever they want it to be. Did you bother to verify if that vest is what they say it is or did you just take their word for it. Now if it is choice #2, your not as smart as you perceive. You may be a military vet, but even you should to be aware of the difference between what something appears to be from what it actually is.

          • LogicalAnswer

            The news networks ARE the gun grabbers, eric! Man you people are unbelievable.

      • Jeff McCabe

        no kidding. Perhaps you can point me to a incident where that happened. Ever. Tons of cases where a bystander stopped an assault using his own weapon, but nothing about your better than even chance. Also, he wasnt wearing body armor., He was wearing a scary black vest with pockets. But no bullet proof. Pro reality, huh?

        • Heather Thornton Wiles

          Do you have any evidence that backs up your claim that “tons” of cases are out there, where a bystander stopped an assault, using their own weapon? ESPECIALLY in a scenario like the one that played out in Aurora? And everything that I’ve read and heard did say that he was wearing body armor, as well as a throat guard and head protection.

          • PennyRobinsonFanClub

            Go to the NRA website and look up the archives for “The Armed Citizen.”

      • Jason Dean

        For the hundredth time HE WAS NOT WEARING BODY ARMOR!!! He was wearing a vest, not a bullet proof vest, a regular damn vest with pockets for gear.

      • Valentine Lucien Thorne

        Your pro nothing. I am not saying that that may not be true. But if someone fired and missed, the gunman would of had an inkling that not everyone there is unarmed and might have to re-think his strategy. I mean the way you make it sound as if he’s Rambo or The Punisher and no matter who attempts to shoot him, he’ll continue, business as usual. Are you kidding?

      • Heather Thornton Wiles

        Well said. That’s kind of what I tried to state. And let’s not forget, he released some sort of gas before he started shooting. More people could have been harmed if there had been more firearms and people wanting to play hero those circumstances. And I guess people forget that he was in fact wearing full body armor. And using weapons and ammunition that only the police and military should have access to.

        • LogicalAnswer

          “And using weapons and ammunition that only the police and military should have access to.”
          Ok and you know how we would limit those items to only police and military? Laws. Please continue and tell me more about how criminals and lunatics like James Holmes obey LAWS, ma’am. There are laws against heroine. You know who uses, sells, and trafficks heroine? Criminals, not law abiding citizens. There are laws against driving drunk and killing people with your car. Criminals still do it, not law abiding citizens. If there were laws prohibiting guns, criminals would still use them, and law abiding citizens could not. Even to protect themselves from said criminals. I know you have heard this argument before, but please try to use what little bit of common sense is left in that head of yours to finally understand it.
          I can’t believe you liberals still say silly stuff like that and make us keep bringing up these basic principles. Principles of American freedom. This is not rocket surgery 😉

      • Rick Dyer

        Then don’t give concealed weapons permits to just any joe/jane on the street. Make them train and become certified. Make them recertify periodically. I’m down with that if they provide the facilities (target range). Then tell me that several trained individuals or the few service members (had they been carrying) would have lost their nerve. Do you think 71 people would have been shot that day if a hand full of theater goers had been packing heat? me thinks not. Even with body armor, maybe it would not have killed him. But it would have make him shart his pants and rethink his situation. just saying.

      • RhodyRick

        He wasn’t wearing body armor, he was wearing a tactical vest, a bunch of pockets and velcro to be precise.

      • america first

        well they all got shot by Holms so no chance is better to you huh? idiot..

    • Jeff Adamo

      If James Holmes even suspected there would be a handful of armed citizens in the theater that night, he most likely wouldn’t have attempted the massacre in the first place.

    • Jеrrу Thоmрsоn

      The reason he chose that theater instead of his college campus was that UC was forced by court order to allow concealed carry on their campuses.

      • Derek Webb

        “I just heard the gun store was robbed.” Said no one ever.

    • Heather Thornton Wiles

      Or, in all the confusion and the smoke and haze, more innocent people could have been shot and harmed or killed by people who wanted to play “hero” with their own weapon.

      • PennyRobinsonFanClub

        Tell us how many times that has happened before in similar situations, and then we can talk.

      • Rick Dyer

        serious? I cannot believe you actually said that out loud, (figuratively speaking) let alone think that ten concealed carry citizens (trained to carry) would just start firing randomly into the crowds of huddled masses on the floor while an armed assailant stands at the exit firing into the crowd. Wow. get ur brain on the clearnance rack did ya? puh leaze!!

      • RhodyRick

        More people may or may not have been hurt if there were armed people in that theater, we may never know, however we do know what happened when they were all defenseless.

      • Dennis M OLeary

        the last thin anyone in that situation would of is to “play hero”.. youre just pissed cuz ppl on here think youre and idiot- and i have to agree with them

      • america first

        your an idiot

  • Ronen Magid

    Another hollywood idiot. Reminds me of Madonna who’s also ‘against guns’, however when an unarmed maniac fan set foot on her estate, he was shot on the spot by her security although no one was in immediate danger.

    • catb55

      Let’s ban the stupid and ugly .. that would take care of a lot of this cr*p.

      • Valentine Lucien Thorne

        No, that would get rid of half the populous who have nothing to do with this celeb idiot. That would be unfair and bias. So yeah, your comment makes no sense.

    • Valentine Lucien Thorne

      Yeah, how ironic is that? Heh. It’s amazing how they hate something t5hat has the potential to be a good thing until something happens to them, then they shut their mouths.

      • Heather Thornton Wiles

        There is no need for automatic or semi-automatic firearms. Those should be banned. I’m from a hunting family, and I love to go to target practice. I don’t believe people should be banned from defending themselves with a firearm. But there is no need for certain TYPES of firearms.

        • PennyRobinsonFanClub

          There’s no NEED for 8 cylinder automobiles or 4 bedroom houses on tree-shaded 1-acre plots. Should those be banned too, just because they’re not NEEDED?
          After all, to each according to his needs, right?

          • Rick Dyer

            Excellent point PennyRFC. Whomever says to ban automatic weapons because they cannot be used or should not be used for personal defense is obviously not watching the news on Syria at the moment, or they are working with a few bricks short of a full load!! A strong militia keeps a strong government in check.

        • Derek Webb

          We don’t NEED grocery stores– we can all farm. And Drive horses. And live in mud-huts!

        • Shelby is a Patriot

          The main point of the 2nd amendment was to insure that the citizens of the united states would be able to not just protect themselves from crazy people like James Holmes, but to protect themselves from a Government that oppresses its people, in other words, so we can form a militia. The fact that we are discussing this shows we are getting closer to that everyday. I don’t know about you, but if such a case ever occurs, I like my chances with an automatic in my hands.

          • Ken Kawalek

            Obviously Miss Heather you like many other liberites are not only wearing blinders you also have your head in the sand. I have a swimming pool. Do I need a swimming pool? No. Does that mean myself and everyone that has a pool needs to get rid of it? After all, I live just a few minutes from the ocean and have numerous rivers and lakes to swim in. What we don’t need is idiots. I propose we get rid of all of them.

        • Shelby is a Patriot

          furthermore, there’s also no need for recycling. Should we ban that, too? 0_o

        • RhodyRick

          Who appointed you the Czar of need determination? If you are qualified to determine how others lead their lives, I guess I’m qualified to regulate your life. Please post a detailed listing of everything you own and an explanation of it’s function and need. This country is about individual liberty, not safety. We can regulate everything if We do it under the banner of making our world safer.

        • america first

          Your 2nd amendment rights ARE for military weapons and to protect our people from evil governments even our own. There is nothing about hunting in the 2nd amendment, Remember Reginal Denny beat almost to death by Blacks in LA Riots he needed a full auto weapon to defend himself and the two others beaten, one was a woman. But you’d rather women get beaten than own automatic weapons?…I see… banning semi or full- auto guns will be as easy as banning drugs and prostitution right? There is no drunk driving problem? 10,000 die every year from evil drunk drivers got to ban drivers. Banning automatic guns will be for law abiding citizens not criminals. So it just amounts to citizen control and nothing more. Read the Federalist Papers you’ll learn what the 2nd amendment is.

        • Walter Warren

          I love how people say that there is no ” need ” for certain types of weapons, but it’s okay to defend yourself. Alright – let me ask this – what if the thing we need to defend against is a tyrannical government – what types of weapons do you suppose we would “need” to defend ourselves against ?

        • Walter Warren

          I love how people say that there is no ” need ” for certain types of weapons, but it’s okay to defend yourself. Alright – let me ask this – what if the thing we need to defend against is a tyrannical government – what types of weapons do you suppose we would “need” to defend ourselves against ?

    • Shane Williams Sr.

      I think we need to have a simple test. Name the pres, the vice pres, the speaker of the house, senate majority leader and the lead justice of the supreme court. 1 wrong answer means you cant vote. Further… if you’re on welfare- you cant vote. How many of the hollywood libs you think would be able to vote? I can think of 1. John Stewart.

      • Heather Thornton Wiles

        I’m on a form of “welfare”. I’m a disabled American citizen. Why do you feel I shouldn’t be allowed to vote? Because I’m disabled? Your “view” is ridiculous.

      • Jim Warren

        You mean chief justice? You can’t vote.

        • Jim Warren


  • bporter44

    Ms Bernhard should not be allowed to have a gun. She should also not be able to have a car or a curling iron.

    • vphilly

      She shouldn’t be allowed to show that face of hers in public.

      • Rick Dyer

        That’s rude and not called for.

    • Colonel_Bat_Guano

      But I do want her to have access to birth control.

  • Mach1Duck

    A piece of paper will lay there and let you wirte anything on it. Some people will belive anything on paper.

  • Mike Bray

    another self absorbed hollywood elitist who really believes her nonsensical opinions really matter.

  • Robert Thompson

    Can we ban Bernhard’s face? I’d like to ban her face. It’s very disturbing to look at.

    • Madcat151

      Clearly a weapon of mass destruction.

    • larry

      poster child for birth control…

    • Romans 8:39


  • Cyrena Bowers Sexton

    “Reinstate gun control” ? Reinstate from when/where? Nazi Germany? Communist Russia? Cambodia? That all worked out well.

  • Northohio

    Liberals have to lie to try to make a point or get they way. They’re not stupid, they know by spreading this crap the average person will believe it.

  • W.l. Sandy Watts

    Ok lets share this with Sandra… When I was in my 20’s (Pre cell phone era) I was at a nightspot in Statesboro Ga. I was not drinking. Some hoodlums who were drinking stripped the outside mirrors off my pick up truck because it had Florida plates. When I confronted the ex-convict and his two friends that had been identified as the parties who did the damage; asking for thier names so I could go to a pay phone and call the police, a scuffle ensued that included the ex-convict armed with very large sharp skinning knife attacking me. Out of sheer luck the door to my pick up was open and I was able to quickly reach inside my pick-up and take a shotgun (that I used for hunting) from my gun rack. The fight dispersed, and no body was injured. However had I not had a gun available to me that night, I have no doubt in my mind that I would have been seriously injured or killed.

  • CFCP Patriots

    The problem is, without really realizing it. We, as Americans can silence these people by not supporting their means of income. I have a list of so called “celebrities” who I will no longer support by watching their movies, listening to their music and such. The problem is, these people think that just because they have gained fame in whatever they do, it makes them intelligent enough to speak out on the issues. They would not be able to function by getting up early in the morning every day to go to a real job.

  • Maria

    I’ve never had a very high opinion of her and now I can’t stand to even look at her. She is utterly uneducated and it shows.

  • Matthew Perel

    I wonder if she or her other Hollywood friends have ever had security or bodygaurds? I bet they carried guns!!!!!! but that would more likely be allowed as they are STARS!!!!!

  • neil hatten

    A mass shooting at a sold-out movie theater in Aurora, Colo. shows what
    one nerd with guns can do in a room full of unarmed people. Hitler, Pol
    Pot, Stalin, Mao etc. show us what an out of control government can do
    to an unarmed population.

    • LogicalAnswer

      Wow. That is a pretty powerful statement.

  • Justin Levesque

    Again, an anti-gun MORON displays her incredible lack of knowledge. Just once, I’d like to see an anti-gun jackass present an argument that shows at least SOME practical knowledge of firearms, instead of the usual ignorant, emotionally fueled, idiotic vitriol. She has absolutely NO idea what she’s talking about. Someone needs to ask her (in front of the press) if she knows the difference between automatic and semi-automatic firearms. Guaranteed she doesn’t. She’s more than a follower of the ‘if it looks like a machine gun, it IS a machine gun’ philosophy. She’s firmly in the camp of the ‘people are too stupid to own guns’ philosophy.
    Isn’t it very convenient how the anti’s scream for more gun control, while ignoring the fact that disarming citizens does NOTHING to disarm criminals. More armed citizens means less crime! The crime statistics the FBI collects PROVES it!
    People like this idiot make me sick. She can stay on her moral high ground; I’ll be down here in the real world, with my carry permit and my gun. I’d bet she’d change her tune if an armed citizen save her from being robbed/beaten/raped/murdered.

  • BorderLine Guy

    Didn’t even know she was still alive.

  • bstringy

    What percent of citizens carrying weapons would result in the lowest gun crime/homicide rate? Is there a break point?

    • Justin Levesque

      I don’t know if there’s a ‘break point’. Statistics prove that more guns in the hands of private citizens equals less crime. Various studies also show that criminals are more afraid of encountering an armed citizen than encountering the police. Mainly because citizens have more freedom to use lethal force to defend themselves and others than the police do. I’m reminded of the LA riots whenever someone calls for more restrictive gun laws. During the riots, the safest places in the city were neighborhoods where armed citizens took to the streets to patrol their own neighborhoods. There’s pictures of Korean business owners and their employees on the rooftops of their businesses with legal rifles and shotguns. Those places were never looted or damaged in any way.

      • bstringy

        Sure, having guns to protect your home or business have never been an issue, but if carrying guns in more crowded areas (mall, theater, public square) provides safety, then logically everyone should otherwise they put themselves at greater risk, relatively. Would it be reasonable to say that everyone carrying a gun could lead to a lot of volatile situations? Maybe not in rural areas, but in most urban or suburban areas I’d say it would. It then becomes a philosophical question of who the gun is serving.

        • Justin Levesque

          That’s an argument (more guns means more shootings) the anti-gun lobby has used for years, regardless of the fact that it’s been proven false. Every time a state has expanded Right to Carry, the anti-gun lobby pulls out the old ‘Wild West’ rhetoric, and the carnage they foretell has never happened. Nationwide, less that 0.01% of people with concealed carry permits have them revoked for committing a crime. Gun owners who bother to go through the process of training and getting a concealed carry permit are VERY aware of the locations and circumstances they can use their weapon.
          The gun is not the problem, in and of itself. The gun is an object. So is a car. More people are killed every year in car accidents than are killed with a gun.

          • bstringy

            I wasn’t taking that argument, just curious if more guns is the proposed solution. The gun lobby doesn’t seem willing to discuss solutions. This issue is similar to dog owners who don’t pick up after them leaving the responsible owners to pay the price. Now we can’t take our dogs to the beach/park. The dogs are not bad, it’s the owners. Still, people got tired of the crap and agreed to keep the dogs out. The same has occurred with carrying guns to concerts, on planes, at court houses and it’s effective. No one gets shot, everyone feels safe. Ultimately, I believe the answer lies in bringing cost effective, unobtrusive weapons detection to more places where people congregate. Protect your home, go hunting and be happy. I think we can all live with that.

          • Justin Levesque

            I have no problem with certain restrictions on ‘where’ one can carry a firearm. Schools, police stations, jails, courthouses, airports, that’s fine. But to restrict carrying ‘where people congregate’, no. That phrase is far too ambiguous, and could be used to fit any location where two or more people get together. If businesses, like Cinemark, want to restrict the carrying of weapons on their property, they have that right. If they want to install detection equipment to filter their customers, they can do that too. People also have the right to not frequent those businesses.
            As far as ‘protect your home, go hunting and be happy’ goes, no. How’s that working in Chicago or D.C.? One can not predict when or where someone with evil intent will strike. That is the whole point of concealed carry.

          • bstringy

            Not that there should be laws restricting guns where people congregate, just that maybe one day technology will afford detection methods that keep guns out as effectively as airports without the burdensome screening process. Think anti-theft system at a department store. It may be years away.

  • Steve Russell

    Bill O’Reilly got it wrong last night as well, saying that there are no background checks to buy “automatic” and “powerful” weapons. There is a natonal call in background check required to buy any weapon! Also, these were not automatic weapons, as automatic weapons are highly restricted, VERY expensive and one has to go through a huge amount of personal scrutiny and basically sign away their personal rights to privacy and search and seizure laws to obtain the stamp needed to own one from the bureau of ATF!
    There is a lot of ignorance and sensationalistic words used to describe weapons commonly used by sportsman and law abiding enthusiasts that are hurting us by both the left and the right by people that have no experience, knowledge or even basic gun knowledge! Words like “automatic”, “high powered”, “assault rifle” and O’Reilly said over and over that no one should be able to buy an AK without the FBI being notified. Well genius, they are!!!!! Semi-auto versions of fully automatic millitary cousins are being assaulted like they were under Clinton, when in truth, they are usually small rounds with less range than many of the guns we sportsman use to hunt with. The only difference is the cosmetic appearance of the so called “assault rifle”! The tried to ban them in the 90’s and all that happened was they changed the appearance, and the price of existing weapons and high capacity magazines went up dramatically!

    • Marty Motes

      exactly.. If you buy more than one gun in a 6 day period you can expect a visit from your friendly neighborhood local FBI field office while they investigate you.

  • Rags Vnvmc

    Who is this hag anyway??? By the way there Sammy Blandfart… automatic guns are already illegal unless you have a Federal Firearm Permit. Learn to read someday and keep the junk out of your arm….

  • David McQuaide

    this womans troll like libtard face could stop a locamotive. extremely repulsive….it should be BANNED…..

  • Paulonater

    you can’t really blame sandra bernhard. She looks like she got shot in the face with the ugly gun.

  • Madcat151

    This from the leftist whore that wanted Sarah Palin to get gang raped.
    Stunningly stupid and hatefull!

  • Lisa Edward

    Typical democRATS women always Ugly DOG

    • rinodino

      Yep, Like Eva, Milas, Beyonce, shall I continue?……………….

  • LogicalAnswer

    What a dumbass.

  • Madcat151

    I love how the liberals post that anyone with a firearm would not have been able to stop him because he had body armor! LMAO! If you left wing retards knew anything youd know that body armor does not make you Superman. When you get hit you go down and typicaly stay down! Bullets even slowed and stopped HURT! and do damage like broken ribs and such. Get your facts straight before you talk leftists ….your just giving the rest of us who actualy think straight things to laugh at all day!

    • erichop

      Check out video of the West Hollywood bank robbery in 1996(?) 9mm rounds bouncing right off the guy as he continues to fire. Might have slowed him down for second but that’s it. Facts straightened.

  • stuckinIL4now

    I think I’ve reached my “ban” threshold today with the oversaturation of calls for bans: ban guns, ban Chik-fil-A, ban tweets. Ban this, ban that, cuz we don’t like it–seems to be all the racist bigoted leftists know. Anything that they disagree with has to be banned. Sure, SB, call on Oban-ner to circumvent the US Constitution again. Or maybe we should just ban bans.

    • Rick Hall

      Yes, ban the Oreo cookie. Ban J C Penny. Ban Google. It’s out of control.

  • Nancy Smith Kerr

    Looking at that picture is a good arguement against what she is fighting for. That is the most respectful way I can put it and not be blunt.

  • Guest

    Another $hit for brains “celebrity”. I honestly don’t know how people like her breathe with her head stuck that far up her a$$

  • larry

    Sandra, who? comedian? by who’s standards? This is the ugliest dyke ever…..who on earth cares what this brain-dead drug addict has to say?

  • DeadBuffalo Blog

    She should be required to register that puss of her’s as a weapon of mass disgust.

  • Rob McGill

    “Gun-grabbers refuse to debate the merits of keeping semi-automatic weapons available to law-abiding citizens.” Gun-nuts refuse to debate the merits of closing the loopholes in the existing gun laws. Loopholes like private sales not being subject to ANY KIND of background check or waiting period, gun stores registering their booths at gun shows as private vendors in order to avoid gun laws, assault weapons, hi-cap mags, body armor, etc.

  • Paul E Guiteau

    I don’t remember, why is Sandra famous?

  • Mike Perry

    The continuing saga of hollywood ignorance.

  • Botzilla

    That wont be a problem since its already illegal to purchase an automatic weapon unless you have a class 3 weapons permit.

  • Venus R Becky

    Can we ban her mouth? That thing is… gives me nightmares.


    I didn’t know this foul woman was still breathing.

  • Laurel

    She is just plain stupid.

  • Romans 8:39

    Put blame where it belongs. The theater has a no gun policy. As usual the law abiding citizens complied and the criminals didn’t. One or two concealed carry holders could have put an end to this very tragic incident and many or all would have been saved.

  • Hiraghm

    And… the 1934 FireArms Act is also unConstitutional.

  • Dale E.Gardner

    Sandra Bernhard…is this skank still around?

  • Jason

    Banning guns b/c some idiot kills people is like banning all forks b/c of obesity

  • Ralf Nader

    Have you noticed how many liberals support the revocation of our civil rights?

  • Ralf Nader

    “A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”- Freud
    Explains a lot doesn’t it-

  • Lefty

    The ignorance is strong in this one…..and in Hollywood in general.

  • NOTP

    What a bunch of paranoid loons you guys are! The only one who makes any sense at all is Eric> He’s telling it like it is and in a very logical way….and what do you do? Attack his service to our country. You will never learn anything unless you listen sometimes. Most of you would piss your pants if it came down to a shooting match in a theater! How can I deduct that? Just by your venom-filled reactions to Eric’s posts. Your nothing but a bunch of big babies dressed up as men. No wonder this country is a mess right now…. Quit blaming the ills of life on a generalized Hollywood elite and start reading and learning in order to make this country the shinig beacon it once was…

  • Jacob

    Another self hating jew bitch

  • Chaps1956

    bow and arrows anyone? guns aint the problem! libs propagating no morals and drugs are the problem! by the way this colo killer is another product of the self absorbed,me first liberal media culture! so if youre an actor,and you play make believe for a living SHUT THE F UP!!!!

  • midnightgolfer

    Yet again… who?

  • Pedro_Schwartz

    Ms. Bernhard can’t be blamed for her ignorance. It’s society’s fault for failing to adequately educate her.

  • Olsoljer

    Bernhard should consider doing donkey shows in Tiajuana.

  • Rodney Brungardt

    I just love how the uneducated in Hollywierd don’t know the difference between a “machine” gun and a semi automatic like an AR15!!!

  • lillymckim

    Bernhard to be “Banned In Boston” too?
    Who’s next?

  • Paul

    The only reason she is against guns i, is that her mom and dad fed her lovarock candy with a Shotgun!

  • Jеrrу Thоmрsоn

    I can sum up the liberal idiot mentality in one sentence: Legalize drugs because you can’t stop people from getting them if they really want them, but ban guns to stop people from getting them.

  • DeafRanger

    She is so clueless. Automatic weapons are and have been illegal. She showed how ignorant she is on the subject. It seems she just wants to run her mouth, getting excited over nothing.

  • DocBrew

    Sandra Bernhard? Being on TV makes you important enough for us to listen to your opinion?

  • Andrea Hanington

    Just a quick note on buying “Automatic Weapons”, my husband owns an M-16 and an M-60 and it took over 8 months to get the paper work finished for the first one and it ran somewhere around $14,000 dollars and the second took a year and somewhere around $24,000 dollars, our home has to be open to the F.B.I at any moment and we follow the law TO THE LETTER. The types of weapons that this douche used can be purchased at almost any store. A shotgun has no waiting period and (at least in my state) an “semi-automatic” weapon like the .40 can be in hand in about 3 days. If he
    “legally” owned the .40 then there were no red flags on him or his background, in which case there really is no way to prevent something like this from happening. The truth of the matter is, this kid is fuc*ed in the head and would have obtained the weapons regardless of legality. I think that justice for him should be swift and no more taxpayer dollars should be spent on giving him appeal after appeal. Kill him and move on!!

  • Paul J. Citro

    Have you noticed all the pews who want to ban the guns. Don’t live where you need a gun.

  • Tim Halpin

    The second ammendment was added to the constitution after we finished taking our country from the British. With that fresh in the minds of the writers of our constitution, they added the second ammendment, in case we had to do it again. We should be able to purchase the same weapons the military can. We could do that until 1934 .

  • Shane Williams Sr.

    I say… Give the colorado guy a gun and one to Sandra and the one that is alive gets to leave

  • Chere Ryan Anderson

    Such an Idiot she is! She needs to realize that the Gangs and other bad person’s will always find ways to get them. While we law biding citizens go with out. I for one am Pro Gun and always will be. Try to break in my house and see what u get! Hmmmm Sandra what would you use against an intruders gun???

  • StarKing

    Lots of pointless speculation here by the gun control types. With over 2.5 million defensive gun uses recorded in FBI records annually there is plenty of real data demonstrating that the fears of the gun control types simply are not coming to pass in the real world. “What if” simply doesn’t carry much weight when the “if” part is demonstrably not occurring.

  • Jeannine Penninger

    Another Hollywood twit and one who should stay out of the public eye. Why oh why do these actors think they know so much? Oh wait, I know, its because the “parties” they belong to want to take away our freedoms. Think about a world run by Leftist actors and actresses. Terrorists have free rein.

  • revrod46

    Can you spell “D – O – G?”

  • Count Hogula

    Is this even a woman? I thought it was Steven Tyler.

  • Sparten1

    Who’s paying you to make this request, Sandra? Surely you couldn’t be THAT stupid on your own.

  • walkingman717

    … hey Sarah Bernhard and Cher — roll up your sleeves, do something good in your communities, help the disadvantaged. Be what a liberal used to be instead of the hate-filled, non-talented, tweeter addicted bags you are.

  • Teresa Pitts

    Another liberal hollywood idiot running their big mouth.

  • Wichai Sinpunpakd

    We need to issue a law that it is a must to have a gun or shotgun in every home in America like Switzerland. Switzerland has very least crimes, becuase everyone knows there is a gun or shotgun in every home. A bad guy have to think twice before he thinks to rob a house with fully armed with weapon.

  • spooky2626

    Sandra if you don’t like the gun owners move to a different country.