When it comes to anti-gun hysterics, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif) is a class all her own, but what she said during CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday may have brought her down a few notches on the crazy scale.

Asked what kind of laws could have prevented the Las Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock, from obtaining as many firearms as he did, Feinstein’s response was surprisingly level headed, and factual. In fact, it’s exactly what the right has been saying all along.

“Could there have been any law passed that would’ve stopped him?” asked Face the Nation host John Dickerson.

“No,” responded Feinstein. “”He passed background checks registering for handguns and other weapons on multiple occasions.”

This is actually the second time she said a law wouldn’t have made a difference. Earlier that Sunday, Feinstein had said the same thing on Meet the Press when she told Chuck Todd “I’m not sure there is any set of laws that could have prevented it.”

Feinstein even praised the NRA for coming forward to review regulations about bump stocks — an accessory device for a semi-automatic rifle that allows it to fire much like a fully automatic. Feinstein did, however, say that a law pertaining to bump stocks must be passed, but that it cannot come as an order from the president.

Feinstein’s “Face the Nation” appearance wasn’t completely clear of ridiculous moments. When asked what she made of the increased purchases of bump stocks right after the shooting, Feinstein responded with saying she didn’t know what to make of it.

How she couldn’t is beyond me. Whenever a shooting happens, gun sales increase due to fear of bans and/or increased regulation. With Democrats attempting to lead one thing or another to the guillotine whenever a shooting occurs, it wasn’t hard to figure out what they were going to put on the chopping block next. Feinstein’s current push to get Republicans to pass a law against them proved their fears correct.

But other than this, I’m surprised at Feinstein’s ability to not take her typical hysterics into fantasy land. Keep in mind, this was the same woman who in 2013 told everyone that it’s legal to hunt humans with 150 round magazines. In 2016, the California senator thought banning people on the terrorist no-fly list  — a government list that prohibits you from air travel without due process — from purchasing guns was a good thing, and said Americans on the list were guilty until proven innocent.

But credit where it’s due. Feinstein actually took a common sense approach here.

She’s correct. No law would have stopped Paddock from obtaining his arsenal. He was, until the shooting occurred, a law abiding citizen welcome to own as many guns and firearm accessories as he pleased, as is our right. Save for a type of gun ban or restriction on ownership numbers — a statist pipe dream in America — there are no laws we can add to our current set that would stop something like Las Vegas from occurring.