New Mexico governor issues order suspending the right to carry firearms in public across Albuquerque

Are national parks not considered open public places?

In working order which is why you had to register your firearm and have it inspected to make sure it worked. And that ready to go at a moment's notice was because they were needed for the defense of the country. Public carry was banned in a good chunk of the states.

I'd say well-maintained and prepared for use. As in tools need be well-maintained to be useful.

No it doesn't lmao

Then why are morbidly obese, middle aged men with zero combat training allowed to own guns?

Well supplied means well supplied

A well regulated militia shall not be infringed

Your right to bear arms is not infringed by specific controls.

You have a right to freedom of religion but local codes still come into okay for sacrifices/burnt offerings/etc.

Just a flourish of words that dont matter?

Or more specifically, Federalist #29, which argued that the US should not have a standing military. THAT was the reasoning behind 2A. Of course our forebears learned pretty quickly that was a dumb ass hill to die on, and we have a huge standing military. The reasons for the 2A have been buried in progress, yet scared neanderthals still feel the need to cower with their guns in fear that the big bad world will touch them.

All that would mean is that there is a current disagreement. The assault weapons ban was constitutional. California’s regulations on firearms is constitutional. Those are all court rulings with a lot more gravitas than a NM TRO.

There is no right via the second amendment for the unregulated possession or carry of firearms, just like there is no right in the first amendment to unlimited free speech. Those are interpretations that are entirely grounded in an optimistic layperson’s interpretation of what a multi century old complex body of laws actually should mean, rather than the actual legal interpretations.

The government tightly regulates speech. It’s allowed to, over-generous interpretations of the First be damned. It is the same thing with firearms.

It’s culture war bullshit that will go back and forth for another century if we last that long. The pendulum is currently in a pro-gun direction. At some point it will swing back and we will have a federal ban on weapons and mag caps again.

The problem of course is the American gun fetish, not the guns themselves. As long as people culturally fetishize guns as symbols of freedom and masculinity, we’re going to have this. It’s got an intersection with Southern and African American honor culture that escalated violence, and an increasing intersection with right wing domestic terrorism, which in turn informs mass shootings. But it’s easier to do an ineffective gun ban than address that.

This is patently false. Take a look at all the restrictions on the 1st amendment. I'm not allowed to walk into congressional chambers and scream at the top of my lungs in protest am I?

Since 2008. It was well understood that regulations were fine until then

Do you take every district court decision to be the last word on what is or isn’t constitutional, or do you wait for the supreme court to rule?

What is “constitutional” changes all the time. The AWB was constitutional. Mag limits were constitutional. Background checks are constitutional.

At some point, this may be found to be constitutional, or not, but it’s not like the constitution is some unchanging document, and it certainly doesn’t mean that federal or state governments cannot restrict who can buy which firearms under which conditions, or regulate how they may be legally carried. That’s been the case forever.