Last month we ran a couple of letters from readers taking us to task for our editorial on the latest Supreme Court ruling on Second Amendment rights.
We should have spiked their comments.
Here’s why: The writers attacked us for a position we don’t hold.
Our editorial views are fair game. We welcome letters that take issue with our editorials, partly because they enliven the opinion pages — we prefer debates to lectures — and partly because criticism tests the strength of our ideas.
Never miss a local story.
But it’s just confusing when others characterize our position as the polar opposite of the view we hold.
The Herald’s editorial board supports the Second Amendment and individual gun ownership. These recent writers criticized us for a stance against the Constitution that we’ve never taken.
I’ve taken another look at our last editorial that caused the hubbub. Here’s what it said in a nutshell.
— The Supreme Court has ruled the Constitution is clear that gun ownership is an individual right.
— If gun opponents don’t like it, their only option is to repeal the Second Amendment.
— And that has as much chance for success as the proverbial snowball.
Maybe the way we worded it sounded to some like we advocate repealing the Second Amendment. For the record — we don’t.