No. It isn't An inhernet part of a right is that when you exercise a right, you arent harming or endangering anyone else -- and so, "speech" that harms/endangers someone else isnt "free speech" and thus not protected.Even if not being able to yell "fire" in a crowded building is violating the rights of others to safety it is still a violation of your freedom of speach.
Rights, by their nature, do not conflict, as they end at the point where they cause harm to someone else.So whos "rights" do you take away? If all literal rights in the Constitution and Bill of Rights must be upheld, then it is impossible for the system to function because some rights contridict others. Does someone think I am wrong on that?
Both of these things violate the constitution, for the reasons already given (and never addressed).So instead, we should just follow common sense. Background checks for criminals and 1 day wating to give someone a day to cool off.