The Countertop Chronicles

Clifford P. Albertson and Constantinos E. Scaros. Both in the NY Times today. Its a shame I have to run one before the other. But here goes (with my emphasis where warranted).

To the Editor:

Re “The Court Considers Gun Control” (editorial, March 18), about the Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision on the District of Columbia’s gun control law:

You refer to Washington’s law — which bans private ownership of handguns and permits only locked or disassembled rifles and shotguns — as reasonable, and, implicitly, you agree with judge-made law that the right to bear arms refers to service in a militia.

If, in fact, the founding fathers envisioned guaranteeing the right to bear arms to individuals only insofar as they participated in a militia, do you suppose that on their off-duty days they were required to turn in their guns, disassemble them or keep them under a trigger lock?

Your concern about the dangers that arise from too-easy access to weapons is sensible. But for the law to change in order to reflect contemporary society, the Second Amendment would have to be repealed by another constitutional amendment, not by judicial legislation.

Constantinos E. Scaros
Cliffside Park, N.J., March 18, 2008

The writer is dean of criminal justice at the Katharine Gibbs School and a professor of history, law and political science at New York University.

•

To the Editor:

Your editorial says, “For the high court to choose this moment to strike down reasonable gun rules would defy common sense.”

One wonders what “reasonable” controls you would consider on the freedoms guaranteed by the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights. There are those who would consider it reasonable to restrict publication of information detrimental to national defense. What “reasonable” rules would you impose for quartering troops in your home? Or what “reasonable” rules would you place on the right to be protected in your home from unreasonable searches and seizures?

In short, none of the other freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights require registration, nor can they be arbitrarily prohibited by any state or local government. If they are abused, suitable sanctions are in place. Why, then, should gun ownership be treated differently?

Clifford P. Albertson
Suffern, N.Y., March 18, 2008