When Beto O’Rourke withdrew from the presidential race, I actually felt a little sad. I was upset that the individual responsible for inspiring more stories on Bearing Arms since Barack Obama was now out of the race and even less consequential than he had been. After all, who was going to say the stupid things that need to be reported on and mocked mercilessly.

It seems that Joe Biden has tried to step into that role in O’Rourke’s absence.

Recently, Shotgun Joe made some comments that betrayed his “understanding” of firearms. They’re even dumber than O’Rourke’s comments, but we’re talking about Joe Biden here. What can you really expect?

I figured it would be a good idea to take a look at a couple of them for a moment.

First up, we have the much-publicized comment about “100 clip” magazines that you may have seen on social media.

Former Vice President and 2020 Democratic candidate Joe Biden thinks big scary boom-boom guns are really bad and you probably shouldn’t have them.

Especially a “magazine with a hundred clips in it.” You definitely shouldn’t have one of those.

“I believe in the Second Amendment, but nobody says you can have a magazine with 100 clips in it,” Biden blabbered, before quickly correcting, “100 bullets in it.”

Now, a lot of people have locked into what Biden said about “a magazine with 100 clips in it.” Such is the way of our people, but even if Biden hadn’t corrected it, we all know what he was saying. Let’s not pretend we didn’t.

Instead, it’s much more useful to address the substance of what he was trying, horribly, to convey.

Biden is making the claim that there’s nothing that expressly gives us permission to have a 100-round magazine. The Second Amendment doesn’t mention magazines or round capacity in the least, so on that he’s kind of right.

The problem is, our constitution isn’t about setting aside the things you can do, it’s about laying out what the government can and can’t do. It also expressly states via the Tenth Amendment that anything not expressly outlined in the constitution is up to the states or the people. What does that mean?

Well, for one thing, it means that the government doesn’t get any say in just how one exercises their Second Amendment rights. If I want a 100-round magazine, I have the right to buy one. No one grants me that right because it’s an inherent right I have by virtue of being a human.

But that wasn’t the extent of Biden’s prattling.

In the same speech, he offered up this:

.@JoeBiden in New Hampshire: “We don’t have the courage to take on the NRA? We protect geese more than we protect, no joke you can only have 3 shotgun shells when you go shooting for geese, we protect geese more than our kids”

Watch the full event: https://t.co/pGI5ZSZaWe pic.twitter.com/jSOLcZsj0d

— CSPAN (@cspan) November 8, 2019

So, by Biden’s reasoning, we protect geese more than kids because we limit the guns used to hunt them to just three shells.

Um, Joe? We have laws against killing children at all. We actually allow people to kill geese. We don’t allow them to kill children. I’d say kids are getting more protection there.

I’m fairly sure the geese agree.

This isn’t the first time a politician has tried to claim we protect wildlife more than children, but each time they’ve failed to account for the fact that we have laws explicitly against murder. That includes children. The mere existence of such laws proves they’re either stupid or lying. I tend to believe they’re just stupid since they somehow don’t feel murder laws are sufficient to protect children but think gun laws will be observed somehow.

Joe Biden is just the latest and honestly, we should expect more of this kind of thing from him as the campaign season progresses.

What scares me is that people are actually buying this argument.