In Connecticut there is pending legislation to limit the amount of information given to the news media printed on a child's death certificate. Several news organizations are fighting this proposed law. The rallying cry for the press is "It is against their First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of the press."
Is this the same press that uses unnamed sources in articles? The same press that won't put the name of an arrested 17-year-old in the paper? The same press that reported the position of troops during a war conflict?
Oddly, when it comes to the Second Amendment, you have chosen to push for tighter restrictions.
You print public opinion polls on the Second Amendment almost daily. I just have not seen any opinion polls on how people feel about the press wanting to print all the gory details of children's deaths. Why not? Shouldn't the press then fight equally for all the amendments, including the Second Amendment?
Well, if this makes you start a public opinion poll on just how much information you need from a child's death certificate, you may put me down as in favor of restricting the amount of information the press receives. Seems to me that saying someone died as a result of a gunshot wound is more than sufficient. No sensationalism is needed.
Your editor emeritus surely wants legislators to tweak the Second Amendment. So if you want to tweak amendments, let's start with the First Amendment.