After walking back her support for a mandatory buyback of AR-15s and the like, Kamala Harris doubled down on her support for a slew of other gun restrictions by selecting Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her VP. Then Donald Trump broke his recent silence on guns by attacking Harris and doubling down on support for gun ownership.

So, we've got New York Times columnist David French back on the show to go over all of the developments. He said Harris is attempting to run away from what he called the "great awokening" of the 2020 Democratic primary, and he said Walz misled the public about having carried the guns he now wants to ban "in war." But he also noted the gun policies she and Walz have now centered their campaign on are fairly mainstream for the most part, both within the Democratic party and even among general election voters.

He admitted that Donald Trump and Republicans are better on gun rights. However, he argued that didn't justify voting for Trump over Harris because the latter is unlikely to be able to institute her gun policies given the most likely outcomes of the 2024 election. Similarly, he argued Harris was unlikely to be able to change the makeup of the Supreme Court during her first term since conservative justices probably won't retire. He said he was more concerned about what Trump could do with the presidency's power over national security than what Harris might be able to accomplish through legislative efforts.

Click this link for your free trial from our sponsor The Dispatch: https://thedispatch.com/join-offer-reload/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=reload0624

Special Guest: David French.

French argued red flag laws, otherwise known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO), provide a kind of stopgap between releasing somebody who is troubled and going through the more complex process of involuntarily committing them. He said they provide a way to intervene with somebody who has demonstrated they are a risk to themselves or others. The Buffalo shooter would have met that standard and been barred from buying the gun he used to carry out his attack had anybody filed for an ERPO against him, French said.

He argued lack of knowledge about how the laws work was likely the reason why it wasn't used in this case and said the governor's call for mandatory police training on New York's red flag law. However, he opposes her plan to require all police file for ERPOs on the basis of probable cause.

French said he wants to see a higher level of scrutiny, like clear and convincing evidence, and a faster turnaround for a hearing with the person subject to the order than the 10 days New York current uses as its standard. But he said the due process concerns many gun-rights advocates have raised around ERPOs are ones that can be addressed and the core of the policy makes sense.

However, he said President Joe Biden's call for a national "assault weapons" ban in response to Buffalo does not make sense. French argued that not only was the previous federal ban ineffective but the guns they target, such as the AR-15, are far more popular today than they were at the time. He further said AR-15s are not the most common guns used in mass shootings and are very uncommonly used in crime overall.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I look at the gun industry's latest effort in Ukraine as well as an ATF report on the industry's huge growth in recent years.

Special Guest: David French.

David has been at the center of controversy for the past several years for his staunch criticism of former President Donald Trump. Now, he's generated more criticism for his opinion on the Rittenhouse case.

We discuss the details of the case and why David believes the not guilty verdict was the correct one. He argues Rittenhouse did not commit murder as a matter of law. However, he argues Rittenhouse was no hero either.

We also debate where the line is for appropriate use of force during a riot. When is it appropriate to use a gun to defend property? Is it ever?

Plus, David believes the open carry of rifles is inherently a problem and could be legally restricted. We debate the merits of open carry and of banning it.

Special Guest: David French.

Plus, how will the High Court's ruling impact the lower courts and all of the other gun litigation moving through the federal system?

I also ask David how he feels about the way red flag laws have actually been implemented since he began advocating for the concept a few years ago. Is he happy with how states are approaching red flag laws? Are they being too loose with the concept of due process? What state has the best model for red flag laws in practice?

I thought it was a very enlightening conversation. You can't beat the perspective of a litigator of David's experience level when it comes to discussing the federal courts. I plan to have him back on again once the Supreme Court case starts to heat up this fall.

Special Guest: David French.