I wonder if you’ve had a chance to read the latest article to address “Arming America” in the most current issue of Playboy. The author basically trashes all of Bellesiles’ critics by suggesting that they are all gun rights nuts and that even if Bellesiles’ data is flawed, it only affects “five paragraphs” in the book.

Since you’re on top of the story, I thought you might be interested. It wouldn’t take much to knock the author’s assertions into the cheap seats.

Well, I don’t read Playboy, even for the articles (I haven’t even picked up a copy of the issue where my brother’s girlfriend posed), and I’m not sure if I want to shell out five bucks or whatever just to refute some already-discredited argument. Maybe it’ll be on NEXIS — I’ll try to check.

But for the record: Pretty much everybody in the legal-historical community (even, reportedly, Garry Wills though he’s said so only privately) now seems to agree that Bellesiles book is bogus, and that the fabrications and misrepresentations permeate the entire book, not just a few paragraphs. I have the advantage of having read the page proofs of James Lindgren’s meticulous dissection in the upcoming Yale Law Journal, and it’s just devastating beyond any hope of redemption, in my opinion. I’ll try to link to a PDF when it’s out — I think that Lindgren will have one on his website.