Larry King, whose career in journalism spans more than three decades, is no fan of the Second Amendment.

For starters, the law is “poorly written,” he told TMZ reporters this week.

“What do [the founders even] mean by 'militia'?” King asked.

The amendment doesn't even serve its original purpose anymore, which was to protect white Southerners from slave uprisings, the former talk show host added.

This is a thing that Larry King really said.

“You know who started the Second Amendment was Southern senators so they could ward off slaves … uprisings,” King said. “Read the history.”

He added, “It was started, eventually it won in other areas, but Southern senators started it so that they could repel slave uprisings.”

For good measure, he added, “And the [National Rifle Association] is the worst.”

Where does one even begin?

One thing that is definitely confusing is the fact that King attacks the Second Amendment as the supposed product of racist white Southerners while also characterizing the NRA as “the worst.” You’d think he’d be a bit fonder of the gun rights group considering it normally acts as something of an equalizer, defending the Second Amendment rights of all persons.

But the most confusing thing here is obviously King’s version of history. For a more accurate view, let’s turn to the Weekly Standard’s Jay Cost, who actually seems to know what he is talking about on this topic:

“The Federalists argued that the Constitution was itself a Bill of Rights — by setting up a proper structure of government. But the Anti-Federalists disagreed,” he noted Thursday on social media. “So the compromise that was hammered out, starting in Massachusetts, was that states would ratify the Constitution with recommended amendments.”

New Hampshire adopted an amendment that read, "Congress shall never disarm any Citizen unless such as are or have been in Actual Rebellion."

Meanwhile, Rhode Island went with the following language: "That the people have a right to keep and bear arms, that a well-regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free state."

And here is what we got from New York: "That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms; that a well-regulated Militia, including the body of the People capable of bearing Arms, is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State."

“That would be 3 of 7 northern states that called for a right to keep and bear arms in their recommended amendments,” Cost noted. “3 other northern states [Connecticut, Pennsylvania and New Jersey] called for no amendments.”

“What is especially pathetic about such ahistorical comments is that all of the primary documents are easily available online with precious little effort,” Cost wrote. “For instance, Google ‘New York proposed amendments to the Constitution 1788.’ It'll be the first hit.”

You’d think a newsman, especially on who has been in the game nationally dating back to the year "Back to the Future" first hit theaters, would keep abreast of the most basic facts of an ongoing national debate. But that’s probably expecting too much.