TexasCHLforum.com

KD5NRH wrote:Then why aren't psychologically unsound people prohibited from speaking?

Because the state cannot demonstrate a compelling interest in such prohibitions. It can, however, demonstrate a compelling interest (public safety) in prohibiting you from yelling "fire" in crowded theater, "I have a bomb" in an airline terminal, etc.

KD5NRH wrote:Which is exactly why the First Amendment should always have the same "reasonable restrictions" as the Second.

It does. Well, not "the same" restrictions, but restrictions that are recognized based on the same legal theory.

AEA wrote:Somebody needs to send that letter to FOX news and highlight the following as being in defiance of the SCOTUS Opinion:

a.. Second, automatic and semiautomatic handguns generally remain illegal and may not be registered.

Lastly, although the Court struck the safe storage provision on the ground that it was too broadly written, in my opinion firearms in the home should be kept either unloaded and disassembled or locked.

With regard to the latter statement, wrong-headed though it may be, it is explicitely stated as nothing more than an "opinion". The Heller decision did not strip the author of the right to voice just such an opinion.