Anti-gun lawmakers rarely seem to talk all that much sense when it comes to gun control. They're almost rabid about trying to advance it and in trying to push their agenda on the rest of us. They don't care about the laws that inhibit them, ironically enough, all while trying to push laws that will inhibit us.

I mean, they blow off the Constitution, so nothing about that should be surprising.

Yet every now and then, I get surprised.

The mayor of Memphis, Tennessee, is in charge of a city where the city council wants to put gun control on the ballot. They know they can't actually do anything, but they wanted to put it on the ballot. The state told them now and now they're trying everything they can to put it back.

The mayor favors gun control himself.

One would imagine that he'd support the lawsuit. Well, since he wants it dropped, it looks like he doesn't.

Mayor Paul Young said Tuesday that he wants a lawsuit filed by the Memphis City Council over gun control measures in the November elections to be dropped.

During an interview on FOX13's Good Morning Memphis, the mayor said the initiatives wouldn't change "how we operate on the ground in Memphis." But he added that he believes there is a need for stricter gun laws in the city.

"I believe putting it on the referendum as a ballot item is going to be futile because local law cannot trump state law," Young said. "Even if we approve this referendum, it does not change how we operate on the ground in Memphis. I think that's confusing to our residents. My hope is that we can do away with the lawsuit and find another path to get safety for our residents in this community."

...

Still, Young said he doesn't believe the lawsuit would be enough to move forward in a fight for gun control laws.

"I certainly understand the sentiments of City Council," he said. "Everybody is looking for solutions on what we can do around controlling guns in our community."

Well, he's right. A referendum will actually change nothing at all. Had Memphis been permitted to put gun control on the ballot, it wouldn't have mattered because as Young says, local law can't trump state law. The can't pass it no matter what the community says or thinks. They can elect legislators to represent their interests at the state level, but that's it.

Young makes it clear that he supports gun control. He even says "controlling guns in our community" at one point. It's clear that he's not a supporter of gun rights as we understand it.

For him to point this out is huge. It couldn't have been particularly easy--it rarely is when you have to acknowledge the other side has a valid point--and yet, he did so.

I applaud him for that.

Now, the question is whether the city council will drop this insane lawsuit that, at best, is a government-funded opinion poll.

Only more goes into polling than just asking a self-selecting group to share their opinions, meaning it's even dumber.