Alec Baldwin, as infuriating as he can be with his ridiculous anti-2A rants, is kind of like Joe Biden in some ways in that he is (sometimes) the gift that keeps on giving. Yes, he says infuriating stuff, but he sometimes (like in today’s story) says stuff that, on face value, seems plain absurd.

You may be aware that Baldwin seems to believe himself to be some kind of expert on guns and gun violence. We know that he’s not (no matter how often he says otherwise), or else he wouldn’t hold the ridiculous positions on private gun ownership that he does.

Now, though, it seems that Baldwin also thinks that he’s a constitutional scholar (again, in spite of pushing for policies that clearly violate the Second Amendment). But is it as silly a statement as you or I probably think? From The Associated Press:

Alec Baldwin on Friday asked a judge in New Mexico to dismiss a five-year firearm sentencing enhancement in the charges against him, saying it is unconstitutionally based on a law passed after the shooting on the set of the film “Rust.”

“The prosecutors committed a basic legal error by charging Mr. Baldwin under a version of the firearm-enhancement statute that did not exist on the date of the accident,” a court filing from Baldwin’s attorneys said.

I hate to say it, but, if this is the case, Baldwin may actually have a point about this particular charge. Or, if we’re being honest, he’s paid enough to have a lawyer who has a clue working on this part of the case for him.

So, maybe Baldwin did actually make a logical legal request to dismiss this particular charge in the case against him.

That’s what makes it so unexpected: it makes sense.

But, like you, I’m sure, I fully expect Baldwin to say lots of ridiculous things during his trial, too, and some of those are likely to be downright funny because they’re that absurd. So, this trial may be entertaining to watch just for the comedy factor from Baldwin, if for no other reason.