As an 8yo, I'd walk into the US Library of Congress alone and ask for rare books.

I like this way best.

You have to get a library card for the library. I don’t see why there is so much outrage over this, and I think the timing is more about budget cuts than about Trump [caveat- firing the archivist might have been personal].

I find the arguments that “he just wants to sow distrust” etc. are completely unbelievable; he has bigger fish to fry than micromanaging the national archives.

No you don't. You only need a library card if you want to bring a book home. Anyone can read at the library.

In considering the LOC's multi-century existence, this parade of horribles never manifested as a meaningful risk. It remains limited to select imaginations.

Why do they need a "legitimate business need" to access the material? Why aren't they instead requiring a simple library card and/or identification.

That's why people are upset. This is more than just requiring a library card.

> Until some random crazy person exercises the same right and destroys an irreplaceable rare book.

Every library I've been in with rare books requires supervision by the archivist if you want to browse them. Sometimes only the archivist can handle the book.

The fact that these rare books aren't all being destroyed in mass tells me that this system works pretty well at screening crazy people from destroying books (and, frankly, there's not a whole lot of people dedicated to destroying rare books).

Sure. The LOC librarians never seemed to be out of sight from 8yo me. And they were always happy to get what I asked for. It was a reasonable, functional arrangement.

https://www.loc.gov/research-centers/use-the-library/researc...

are you being reductionist on this, and "demanding" that unconstrained access exist as a norm?

I don't find identified purposeful access objectionable. I am concerned at the amount of degredation to works from constant public access to them: its a thing in european museums, cultural exhibits, lasceaux..

That is the main thing I mean by free.

I agree, requiring ID and even appointments is something that isn't objectionable. The issue I have is requiring a justification. Who approves or dismisses justifications? What's considered an invalid justification?

Unconstrained access isn't what I'm talking about, unjustified access is.

When the same energy should have either been applied to all the other administrations

Or only focus on the things that actually are unique

I am pretty skeptical of "let random people touch difficult to replace things when you don't know who they are".