A license/permit required to exercise certain or all 1st amendment rights
A license/permit required to exercise certain or all 2nd amendment rights
Registration requirement of some or all of your books and other 1st amendment related things
Registration requirement of some or all of your firearms and other weapons.
A ban on certain books,religions, what the press can report and etc.
A ban on certain weapons.
A ban on certain individuals from exercising 1st amendment rights
A ban on certain individuals form exercising 2nd amendment rights
A total ban on 1st amendment rights
A total ban on 2nd amendment rights
This speaks in no way to the constitutionality of licensing simple ownership or possession. For this to have any menaing -- that is, to argue apples and apples -- the license to exercise the right to keep and bear arms would have to be in a similar circumstance -- that is, for use on public property.
There's absolutely no sound argument for this, or its constitutionality.Assault weapons (including military brand sharpshooters) should require psychological testing and licensing and be subject to temporary bans under the advisement of local police authorities.
All of the restrictions on free speech revolve around the point where someone else is harmed or placed in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger.
How/why is this not a legitimate standard for restrictions on the 2nd?
The reality is that any restriction on same is a restriction on something that does not fall under 'free pseech'. For any similar restrictions to be applicable to the 2nd, the actions in question would have to similarly fall outside the right to arms.The reality is that there are reasonable restrictions and 'infringements' on the use of free speech.