I couldn't help but notice the juxtaposition. On one side of the morning paper's opinion page is a piece advocating more gun control. To be fair, the piece advocated a tough standard on suspected terrorists. But that would be just a starting point. Many of us suspect that the msm, and Bloomberg in particular, would like nothing better than to claim they were responsible for laws that would ultimately require law abiding citizens to relinquish their firearms to the federal government. If luck in on their side, a Democrat in the White House next year might nominate some Supreme Court Justices who would be complicit in abolishing some of the hard won rights under the 2nd amendment.
As for the tough stance against gun buying terrorists, the bureaucrat who decides who is or isn't a terrorist may subscribe to the lists supplied by the leftist groups who think the biggest threat to the U.S. is from political conservatives.
On the other side of the page is a piece decrying Donald Trump's withdrawal of press credentials from WaPo for his rallies. (Read it at the WaPo site.) Of course there's the obligatory reference to the 1st amendment. There's some irony there. What a shame they can't respect both the 1st and 2nd amendments equally.
By the way, whether or not the Washington Post has a legitimate complaint, it really isn't a 1st amendment issue. Trump isn't the government -- are they simply looking ahead?
Aside: Washington Post's complaint about Trump is reminiscent of the media complaints about Sarah Palin when she stopped interviews with newspaper editorial boards even when everyone knew the boards were going to trash her no matter what she said. Trump is showing that it takes a tough skin to run against the main stream media.