Gresham's column typifies the attitudes that conservative perspectives have been criticized for: "If you aren't with us you are against us, and that diminishes your credibility and our respect for you." Said differently: "We are good; if you aren't clearly in support of us you are evil, there is no middle ground." There is compromise and negotiation possible between different ideas, but there is none with evil, which seeds disruptive and unnecessary polarizations when indifference is deemed a statement of opposition and so is not worthy of respect and instead warrants separation and disparagement.
The WWP apparently wishes to remain unheard and unaligned on guns and other polarizing, divisive topics that have nothing to do with WWP's mission. To a balanced perspective that seems reasonable, legit and ought to be good business. But the condemnation that earns, as expressed in Gresham's essay and the responses of others who will abandon WWP and disparage them for such official indifference to guns goes past just ignoring that indifference, which does no harm to anyone, and casts them as anti-gun simply because they aren't pro-gun. It costs the WWP the support of those who subscribe to the aforementioned attitude, one that when applied to a larger context contradicts one of the fundamental founding principles of this country- the freedom to be who one is as long as it harms no one else, and respect for those that have the same freedom but are different from us.
Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how popular it remains?