Well, they are discussing the interpretation of the wording used in the article- which is interesting, but, to be honest, completely irrelevant to my arguments. In my opinion, the article should be ammended or deleted outright, as I firmly believe, looking at numbers and from personal experience, that having guns available is a much bigger threat to the people's security than keeping a tight control.
Obviously, changes aren't so easy as in, say, the UK, due to said Constitutional protection and therefore US lawmakers have to dance around the specific wording since there is no chance in hell a 2nd Amendment Amendment is going to pass in my lifetime- but that is matter for the Supreme Court to decide, not two guys on a show.