As we’ve documented numerous times, normally ABC’s “The View” is absolutely not the place any self-respecting person will go if they’re looking for informed and enlightened commentary on what’s going on in America.

But on the Tuesday broadcast, “View” co-host and self-styled expert on everything Sunny Hostin let an accidental truth slip out during a discussion about Sunday’s Greenwood, Indiana, mall mass shooting which saw three people killed and two injured before a good guy with a gun reportedly took out the murderer, preventing him from gunning down more innocent people.

During the segment, fellow liberal loon co-host Joy Behar expressed skepticism about the “good guy with a gun” theory on a general level before being corrected by conservative guest co-host Lindsey Granger.

“They say that a good guy with a gun can control a bad guy with a gun. Well, we saw in Uvalde that that’s not true,” Behar ignorantly declared, apparently not understanding (perhaps willfully so) that had the “good guy” cops acted when they were supposed to have in Uvalde instead of waiting 77 minutes, likely countless lives would have been saved.

After Granger pointed out that “good guy with a gun” scenario played out in Indiana, Behar’s response was to merely label it “a lucky moment” before launching into a spiel about how good guys with guns should be on board with Democrat efforts to further curtail Second Amendment rights:

Joy Behar rejects the fact a good guy with a gun often stops a bad guy with a gun.
And when confronted by Republican Lindsey Granger with the Indiana mall shooting hero, Behar scoffs: "That was a lucky moment."
Behar also claims an AR can "kill thousands at once." pic.twitter.com/UkdJH5WrU0

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) July 19, 2022

But it was Hostin, who again regaled the audience about her alleged firearms expertise, who let the mask slip off as the discussion continued, first going on a mini-rant about Uvalde before trying to throw cold water on the “good guy with a gun” story from Greenwood by seemingly agreeing with Behar that the hero, who police have identified as Elisjsha Dicken, 22, was just “lucky” he got off a couple of good shots.

“Listen, I was trained when I was at the Justice Department in firearms. And I was trained in defensive firearm training,” she proclaimed. “It is very hard to hit a moving target. It is hard for people that are trained to hit a moving target. It is very lucky that that good Samaritan hit that moving target in that way.”

Hostin then fretted over the fact that though the good guy from Sunday’s mass shooting incident had a permit for his Glock handgun, “he wasn’t supposed to – he had a gun permit but he wasn’t supposed [to be] in the mall with a gun.”

Incredibly, she went even further by falsely accusing Dicken of “breaking the law” because he went into a mall that had an anti-gun policy.

“So, he broke that law even though he was a good Samaritan,” Hostin, a former federal prosecutor and purported Supreme Court bar member stated, apparently unaware that in Indiana Dicken was within his legal rights to carry his firearm into the mall despite mall code.

After Hostin lied by suggesting that Dicken “broke the law,” Granger pointed out that she was wrong.

“The law of Indiana is different than the law of the mall, of Simon Malls,” Granger told Hostin before schooling her on how she [Granger] “would say that takes precedence when you save a life.”

It was in that moment that Hostin told on herself and her fellow gungrabbers perhaps more than she had at any other moment during the back and forth exchange.

“Well, well, he saved a life, but what if he …,” Hostin began before getting rescued by co-host Whoopi Goldberg, who said they had to go to a commercial break.

Watch:

Sunny Hostin SMEARS the Indiana mall hero!
She falsely claims he "broke the law" by carrying a gun in the mall.
In reality, the local authorities say he was legally carrying.
Granger points out that Indiana law permitted him to carry in the mall.
Whoopi abruptly ended convo. pic.twitter.com/BWAb85R0ZX

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) July 19, 2022

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to comprehend that there is and should be no “but” in these situations. If the good guy with a gun (civilian) hadn’t acted Sunday, more people would have died. Period. If a good guy (civilian) hadn’t acted in Missouri over this past weekend after a disturbed individual targeted stores for robbery, the perp would have hurt more people. If a good guy with a gun (in this particular case, police officers) hadn’t acted at an elementary school in Alabama in June when a deranged person repeatedly attempted to enter the school through locked doors and windows, students, teachers and administrative staff could have been hurt – or worse.

This is just further evidence that you can’t appease gun rights opponents (nor their allies in the MSM) no matter how hard you try. Even in a situation where lives are saved by a man who is lawfully carrying his weapon, there is a “but” there, because they simply can’t wrap their brains around the concept that American citizens have a right to use a gun to defend themselves and those around them.

That said, you can rest assured that when liberals like Behar and Hostin travel to social functions, armed security (whether private or otherwise) is on standby to keep them safe from harm, just like it is for the likes of Second Amendment opponents like Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) who has gone strangely silent on his disgusting good guy with a gun theory in the aftermath of what happened in Indiana.

And you can be doubly sure that they damned sure wouldn’t care if their armed security were “breaking” mall code if they found themselves in a situation similar to the victims in Sunday’s mass shooting.

As I’ve said before, it’s always good enough for them, but it’s never good enough for you. Never forget that when powerful people openly advocate for chipping away at your Constitutional rights.

Flashback: Rep. Eric Swalwell Takes Appalling Cheap Shot at “Good Guys With Guns” After Odessa Mass Shooting