First, I actually think that the Supreme Court ruling that prevents Chicago from banning handguns is probably correct, in that it seems to be consistent with the right to bear arms. I might not like the consequences of the ruling, but it does seem to me to be consistent with the law.
Second, the following segment on Larry King live is just absolutely terrible in so many ways. Both the token "liberals" and the token conservatives make mind-numbingly vapid arguments. If this is where people turn to to get their information, God help us all.
But on to the substance! Dana Loesch was on Larry King's show yesterday offering her opinion on the aforementioned Supreme Court ruling. When James Carville sarcastically says everyone should get a bazooka, Loesch replied, "Can we do that? Because yeah, let's do." Later, Larry King asked Loesch to define "arms." Here's how she responded:
Loesch: How do I define arms. Oh gosh. I don't think there should be a restriction on firearms.You can watch the full "debate" here:
King:You said the 2nd Amendment is clear so arms would include machine guns, right?
Loesch: I hate the war and I hate the B.S. term, with respects to Penn whose show I like, the B.S. term "assault rifles" and "assault weapons." We're going to put the term assault in front of it because we don't understand that adding something cosmetic really doesn't make a gun anymore accurate. It's just cosmetic.
King:How do you define arms?
Loesch: I define arms by weapons period. I define arms by firearms, by guns. Period.
King: So guns would be a machine gun?
Loesch: Yeah. Sure. It freaks people out but I just don't believe in that restriction. I don't believe the government can act like a nanny.
Also interesting, the day after this catastrophic low point in the history of television, Larry King announced that he's quitting his nightly TV show to spend more time with his family. Could this possible be a coincidence?