That's why I reached out to Cam Edwards, editor of Bearing Arms and longtime newsman, to give his opinion on the story and discuss mine as well. Cam recently interviewed Parkland father Ryan Petty about The Post's decision and how some families have reacted to it. He said Petty and several other families were disturbed by The Post publishing the images, especially since not everyone affected was directly contacted by the paper.

Cam argued that The Post's decision to selectively publish only pictures from mass shootings that featured AR-15s made the effort transparently political. We discussed how pictures from other mass killings are almost certainly equally disturbing. But The Post singled out AR-15s as part of a clear effort to get those particular guns banned, something that was underlined by an editorial published alongside the pictures.

Cam said he didn't view The Post's efforts as journalism. Instead, he argued the paper was engaged in direct activism.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I talk about the strange reasoning a federal judge used to uphold Colorado's gun waiting period.

Special Guest: Cam Edwards.

Despite making multiple threats, hearing voices, and being committed to a mental institution; the shooter was about to obtain and keep his guns. Federal law bars anyone who was involuntarily committed from possessing firearms, and Maine has a version of the so-called red flag laws he should've qualified. So, why was he able to carry out the attack with guns he shouldn't have legally had?

To help answer that question and give expert insight into how these laws work in practice, we have Bates College Professor Michael Rocque on the show this week. Rocque has spent years studying mass shootings. He's also researched red flag laws and is very familiar with how Maine's law works.

Rocque argued the problem seems to have been both a breakdown in communication, perhaps between the multiple different layers of authority, and follow-through by law enforcement. He said multiple people tried to do the right thing in expressing their serious concerns about the shooter's mental health. However, unfortunately, not everyone did everything needed to ensure he wasn't able to pull off his attack.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss Ruger's continued sales slide.

Special Guest: Michael Rocque.

After an initial exchange of fire with the shooter, police waited upwards of an hour to storm the room he was in and neutralize him. I've taken multiple active shooter training courses, and this response appears to go against everything people have been taught for decades. It also seems to have given the attacker the opportunity to kill more children.

But I wanted to bring on somebody even better versed in both active shooter response training and what it's like to respond to a shooting in reality. That's why Active Self Protection's Mike Willever joined the show this week. He is a former federal agent who taught active shooter response training. He also once responded to a shooting as it was happening.

He was as exasperated by the response to Robb Elementary School as I was. Active shooter response training is not complicated, he said. You go to the threat as fast as you can and neutralize it before doing anything else.

Willever said, from what we know now, it does not make sense that leadership on the scene decided to treat the shooter as a barricaded suspect. When shots are still being fired, as they were in this case, there is no reason to wait. When there are injured victims trapped inside with the shooter, as they were in this case, there is no reason to wait.

There just isn't an excuse for how law enforcement handled this. And there never will be.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogelman and I discuss the latest dismal financial release from the NRA.

Special Guest: Mike Willever.

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.

We discuss his recent piece in The Washington Post warning of the dangers of the case. Bernick is skeptical of the logic being employed by prosecutors to charge the parents with negligent manslaughter in an attempt to hold them responsible for their son's criminal acts. He argues the prosecution could set a troubling new precedent that will be used against vulnerable populations once this high-profile case fades from the headlines.

He said expansions of how broadly serious criminal offenses are interpreted tend to lead to an increase in prosecutions of minorities. We discuss how that principle often applies to gun laws but is rarely given the same level of discussion. We also look at how the same question is being considered in the Supreme Court's gun-carry case.

At the same time, we debate the culpability of the parents involved in the Michigan school shooting and what kind of consequences they should face. Prosecutors allege the pair were informed about their son's notes and drawings indicating he was about to carry out his attack on the very day it happened but did nothing to intervene. If the parents shouldn't be charged for the killings themselves despite allegedly providing access to the firearm and doing nothing to respond to the warning signs, what should be done instead? Are safe storage laws a good alternative as Bernick suggests?

Plus, contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I cover the latest developments on permitless carry in Florida as well as Beto O'Rourke's faltering poll numbers in the Texas gubernatorial race.

Special Guest: Evan Bernick.