Emily Miller under attack

We’ve featured several posts here about Emily Miller who did a series of articles about her trials and tribulations while she tried to arm herself in the District of Columbia which appeared in the Washington Times. Since then, she’s gone to work at WTTG, the DC Fox affiliate and not surprisingly, she has carried on with her work in regards to 2d Amendment issues. The other day, she spoke at a rally of pro-gun supporters who gathered at the Maryland Statehouse for their cause, and, of course, she’s being criticized by the Left, most notably Media Matters;

Emily Miller, a reporter for Washington, D.C. Fox affiliate WTTG (Fox 5), is facing strong criticism from journalism experts over her outspoken advocacy for gun rights, with one journalism professor suggesting her conflict of interest is a fireable offense.

Miller, Fox 5’s chief investigative reporter, has openly advocated on behalf of gun rights groups, most recently speaking at a rally in Annapolis, Maryland on Tuesday that was organized by the National Rifle Association’s lobbying arm and local gun rights groups.

Journalism experts, huh? I guess they mean the people around their corporate water cooler. Piling on is Washington Post‘s Eric Wemple (with whom I have my own problems);

A bio on the Fox5 site lists Miller as the station’s chief investigative reporter, though a more accurate title would be chief investigative reporter-cum-gun activist. As reported by Media Matters, Miller recently addressed a gun-rights rally in Richmond, where she said, “It’s great to be in Virginia, which is part of America where you recognize the Second Amendment. I came from D.C. this morning, which is not part of America, because they don’t recognize the Second Amendment.”

Aside from the gun issues that Miller has addressed in the short time she has been at WTTG she’s also investigated the police department’s breast feeding policies, she’s written about how DC politicians skip out on answering for their traffic and parking tickets, also she has uncovered malfeasance with the E-Z Pass system around the District. She’s also tried to get a carry permit for her gun and she reports on her progress in that regard. I should mention that Miller became a supporter of the 2d Amendment when she became a crime victim a few years back while living in the District.

My point, I guess, is that she has worked as a journalist and she’s investigated several areas other than guns. I don’t see anyone calling her a breast-feeding advocate. I also don’t see anyone calling out the Washington Post for their advocacy of gun control, either. In fact, I’m so anal about this subject, here’s a bit from the New York Times on Washington Post columnist Carl Rowan back in 1988;

Mr. Rowan, a longtime advocate of tougher gun controls, is expected to be arraigned Monday, said his attorney, Raoul L. Carroll. He said his client would plead not guilty to the misdemeanor charges, which call for a maximum penalty of two years in jail and a $2,000 fine on conviction.

The .22-caliber pistol used in the incident belonged to Mr. Rowan’s son, Carl Jr., a former agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who had given the gun to his father. It was not registered with the District, which has a 1976 ordinance mandating that all such weapons be registered.

I guess that was fine that a Washington Post journalist was known as a “gun control advocate”, never mind that he was in possession of an unregistered gun, as opposed to Emily Miller who went through the mind-numbing process of actually registering a gun in the District. In 1981, Rowan wrote that “a law that says anyone found in possession of a handgun except a legitimate officer of the law goes to jail—period.” In a 1985 column, Rowan wrote that there should be a law that restricts gun ownership to police and the armed forces. As a side note about Rowan, the jury was deadlocked at his trial and the judge declared a mistrial. The prosecutor didn’t bother taking him back to court, because…reasons.

Back to the Media Matters link;

Patrick Pexton, a former Washington Post ombudsman, offered a simple answer to whether Miller should be advocating for gun rights while still a reporter: “She shouldn’t. Period.”

He later said, “To call her a reporter is a stretch. She’s more like an activist; there’s no pretense of objectivity here. Emily Miller can call herself whatever she wants, it’s a free country. Free enough that we can see right through her.”

Anyone care to prove to me that the Washington Post doesn’t advocate for more gun control? Anyone? With headlines like these;

Guns sales spiked after the Ferguson unrest. Will gun crime rise as well?

Gun happy men are leaving weaponry under the tree – and women are loving it.

Bang: The troubled legacy of toy guns

Two years after Sandy Hook, the gun control movement has new energy

Stop blaming mental health for gun violence. The problem is guns.

How guns make police less safe, their jobs more difficult and communities less trusting

Two years later, Newtown has meant almost nothing to the gun debate
Gun control hits a new low.

As you can imagine, I could go on – the Washington Post doesn’t have any gun-advocates on their staff, but their ombudsman doesn’t like someone who is open about their pro-gun position.

Category: Guns