Yesterday's gun ruling by the United States Supreme Court may be the first to interpret the Second Amendment but calling it historic may be histrionic.
The First Amendment and the Second Amendment are part of the bill of rights and define the limits of government relative to the citizens. Neither confers an absolute affirmative right on individuals.
The government cannot ban speech under the First; the government cannot ban guns under the Second.
The government can establish reasonable time, place and manner rules for the exercise of free speech; the government can establish reasonable time, place and manner rules for the use of guns.
The government can require a permit for use of free speech in a parade; the government can require a permit for use of a gun.
The government can set rules on where speech can occur (on the sidewalk, not in the Capitol); the government can set rules on where you can carry/use a gun.
Just as all speech isn't entitled to protection (obscenity, yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, slander or libel); the right to possess/use all guns/ammo (assault weapons, armor piercing ammo) isn't entitled to protection.
And, finally, just as the First Amendment doesn't constrain the right of any private person or organization (including colleges and universities) to set whatever rules they want on speech; the Second Amendment doesn't constrain the right of any private person or organization (including restaurants, colleges, concert venues, apartment complexes) to set whatever rules they want on guns.
May common sense rule.
