News Tip: Supreme Court Rejection of Handgun Ban Would Not Rule Out Other Restrictions, Experts Say
Public policy professors Philip J. Cook and Kristin Goss say regulations can balance personal rights and public safety
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
print
|
email
|
digg
|
del.icio.us
Philip J. Cook is available for additional comment at pcook@duke.edu or (919) 613-7360. Kristin Goss can be reached at kgoss@duke.edu or (919) 613-7331.
If the U.S. Supreme Court rejects Washington, D.C.’s ban on private ownership of handguns, the decision would not completely rule out reasonable handgun restrictions, say two Duke University experts on guns in America.
The high court is hearing arguments today in the landmark case. The court has not commented on the interpretation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution since 1939.
“If the court decides that there is an individual right of gun ownership, we will have to judge state and national ordinances on the basis of their balance between protecting personal rights and protecting the public interest in safety,” says Philip J. Cook, Duke professor of public policy and an expert on the costs of gun violence.
“There is a good deal of evidence that some gun control measures can achieve this balance,” he says.
Cook’s 2000 book, “Gun Violence: The Real Costs,” documented the broad societal impact of gun violence, and he has written numerous articles on gun usage in crimes over the last 30 years.
Most recently he co-wrote a research report called “Underground Gun Markets” (The Economic Journal, November 2007) that documented the difficulties Chicago’s gun ban creates for criminals seeking to obtain weapons.
Kristin Goss, a Duke assistant professor of public policy and author of “Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America,” says that the Supreme Court traditionally has been uncomfortable issuing rulings that get too far out ahead of public opinion.
“The fact that for 20 years there has been little appetite, even among most professional gun control advocates, for pursuing handgun bans may give the court political cover to declare the D.C. ban unconstitutional. But other, more moderate restrictions -- which are popularly supported -- should withstand even a landmark ‘individual rights’ interpretation of the Second Amendment,” she says.