There’s a strong argument, too, that the right to bear arms should be treated the same the right to free speech. Certainly it should be given at least the same respect as the right to have an abortion. But the regulation of property is completely inapt – there is no constitutional provision that bans “infringement” of property rights – only compensation if the property is taken.

Even that analysis, however, would be an improvement on the deference to gun rights in the court system until recently: Take my gun? Pay for it.

(Actually, with greater protection, since the former is actually mentioned in the Bill of Rights.)

Here is one of my favorite passages …

“In striking down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban last week, a federal appeals court raised the crucial constitutional question: What should be the degree of judicial deference to government regulation of firearms?”

Um … no.

The crucial constitutional question is: what can the degree of government regulation of firearms be given that the constitution establishes a right to bear arms? (Be it individual or collective and, in spite of its doctrinal pedigree, I have to admit that I find the “collective right” line of reasoning rather silly.)

The appropriate standard here in not what constitutional scholars would call “rational basis test” as the author implies in the paragraph you mention, Julian. The rational basis test only applies to laws that run afoul of no constitutionally guaranteed right or pertain to no suspect (i.e., protected) class of people such as minorities or women.

There is a legitimate argument for a *compelling* (rather than rational) government interest in limiting the rights of people to bear arms which has both theoretical and empirical components. But this author – thankfully merely a rogue professor rather than the editorial board of the Washington Post – hits on none of them.

And, in doing so, he does a great disservice to those people (myself not included) who advocate on behalf of the sort of draconian anti-gun laws that the no handgun policy in DC represents.