In a blog post today, Bill O’Reilly wrote that “the price of freedom” means that “violent nuts” like Las Vegas mass shooter Stephen Paddock “are allowed to roam free until they do damage, no matter how threatening they are.” But here’s the rub: O’Reilly actually supports gun control (just don’t call it that).

Today, O’Reilly hinted at his stance in his blog post before he got to his “price of freedom” comment:

But having covered scores of gun-related crimes over the years, I can tell you that government restrictions will not stop psychopaths from harming people. 

They will find a way. 

Public safety demands logical gun laws but the issue is so polarizing and emotional that little will be accomplished as there is no common ground. 

As Raw Story noted, international murder statistics do not verify O’Reilly’s suggestion that gun control will not save lives:

According to the most recent data charted, the United Kingdom, where guns are illegal, 755 people were killed in 2009. In Australia it was 229 in 2010. In Canada, where “gun laws [are] strict in comparison to the United States,” only 554 people were murdered. In the United States, however, the murder rate was 12,996 people in 2010.

However, as someone who has probably spent at least as much time watching O’Reilly as an ardent fan, I know that he actually supports stricter gun laws. It doesn’t go with the conservative character he has made for himself so he has kept his views somewhat under wraps.

But every now and then it pops out. For example, in a 2012 debate with then-Congressman (now Fox News contributor) Jason Chaffetz, O’Reilly blasted Chaffetz’ reluctance to impose tighter regulations about reporting sales of weapons and ammunition with the kind of ferocity normally reserved for liberals.

Watch it below, from the July 24, 2012 The O’Reilly Factor.