Thank you, Gabe and Tycho. Thank you for this.
As Moe Lane said, the amendments in the Bill of Rights are interlocking and, combined, they seek to achieve two particular goals that aren’t always compatible with each other: maximum freedom for individuals and a cohesive and strong civil society. You can not have an effective First Amendment without the Second, but neither can the Second exist without the First. Together, they provide the means by which an assortment of rugged individualists can form safe communities and govern themselves competently, if not always wisely.
Oddly, few who make specious and self-righteous arguments to hack away at gun rights are willing to apply those same arguments to free speech. Okay, perhaps not so odd, really. But that cuts the other way, too. Nothing good happens when we all whip out our scalpels and commence to carving on the Constitution, even if we think our cuts are needed to protect other parts of the document.