That is common sense. How far a restriction can go gets settled by the people, through lawmakers and future court adjudications.
I don't necessarily disagree until it comes to "prior restraint".
Do I want people to be able to "freely" yell "FIRE" in a public theater? Heck no. Why? Because it likely would cause panic and chaos, which could lead to injury and/or death of innocent people. Thus, we have a law against it. But you must first actually yell "fire" for the law to come down on you. Prior restraint would be that you cannot say anything in the theater because of the fear that you might yell fire, or that all patrons would have duct tape put over their mouths so that they couldn't yell out inside of the theater.
Telling me I can't own a handgun because I might use it for criminal purposes, is prior restraint of my right to keep and bear arms. Telling me I cannot have a handgun because handguns are used by criminals for illicit purposes goes beyond prior restraint in that it punishes the innocent for the actions of the criminals.
Now, a "reasonable" restriction on my right to keep and bear arms is that I cannot use my handgun for target practice at the local park, unless said park has a public gun range where it would be "safe" to do so. Laws against discharging firearms within city limits are OK too, because those laws would not be enforced if I was forced to shoot at some intruder in my house or on my property if he threatened me. That should be classified as self defense, in which case, "discharging a firearm" laws would not apply.
Also, I wouldn't have a problem with local governments saying that if you want to carry a handgun, we'd prefer you carry it concealed to prevent our sheeple from freeking out. For you see, we've 'dumbed" most of them down in our public schools so that they are scared poopless at the mere sight of a gun. The media has helped us in that regard. So, we understand you have a right to keep and bear a handgun in public, according to the 2nd A., but, could you please keep them out of sight to avoid panic in the streets.
In some states, you can openly carry, but you must have a permit to carry concealed. I'm not against that necessarily, as most state constitutions specifically state that the government may regulate the carrying of concealed weapons. That comes from the time when the sheeple weren't scared poopless of guns and it was accepted practice to carry them around. Anyone carrying concealed was thought to have criminal intentions in mind, where the element of surprise was necessary to commit the crime.
But prior restraint of law abiding citizens civil rights should not be tolerated in my opinion. That goes for any rights, but especially rights which the COTUS says "shall not be infringed". Having a law that says I cannot shoot my handgun at the local park does not infringe on my right to keep and bear arms. A law that says I cannot keep a handgun in my house, certainly does infringe upon my right.
