So Cracked has a new video up.
And it seems a bit... familiar.
You can tell their argument is... problematic when the main pillars of their argument are
1) The 2nd Amendment is totally about militias and the NRA is crazy for lobbying otherwise.
2) Nobody wants to ban guns. Which is... interesting given laws President Obama lobbied congress to pass, and the similar laws Hillary wanted enacted.
Now 1 is.... hilarious. Since the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that yes, the 2nd amendment is about an individual right in Heller. Where they split 5-4 was, given the 2nd being an individual right, is a handgun ban against said amendment?
So, going the 2nd is about Militias is against the SCOTUS rulings.... in addition to basic logic. If the 2nd said that militias could not be infringed... what does that /mean/? That a bunch of guys can make and armed cadre and the government can't infringe on it? That a state can make an army and the feds can't say no?
Of course 2 is based on the argument of "Hey as long as the government doesn't do door to door confiscation of every gun the NRA should shut up."
At least it's not as bad as the earlier Cracked article mentioned here.
Do note that that article 5 Reasons even Gun Owners should hate the NRA is written by the same guy who earlier, wrote about how awesome gun ban are and thinks that the NRA is bad for gun owners... because they oppose gun bans.
So... yeah Cracked goes this "nobody wants to ban your guns" in one video, where they have several articles, about how great gun bans would be.
Including one video about how great Australasia's.... mass confiscation was.
It's kinda hard to buy the whole "The NRA is paranoid for thinking people want to ban guns" from a publication that has recently demanded gun bans.