[NorthMountain]

One example is that the right to free speech doesn’t allow someone to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater.

That again ...

I'd say you have a positive OBLIGATION to yell "Fire" (and pull the fire alarm) in a crowded theatre if there actually is a fire.

Or is it that you support private citizens owning mortars, howitzers, rocket launchers, warplanes and nuclear weapons...?

That again ...

The simple answer is "yes".

Since the primary utility of automatic weapons is mowing down a crowd or forcing adversaries to keep their head down (see my earlier post),

And your point is ...

You fail to understand that the Second Amendment isn't about target shooting, or hunting, or personal self defense. It's explicitly ("security of a FREE state") about KILLING TYRANTS. Keeping and bearing military weapons is absolutely protected by 2A.

[PreciousLiberty]

‘That again ...

I’d say you have a positive OBLIGATION to yell “Fire” (and pull the fire alarm) in a crowded theatre if there actually is a fire.’

But of course the point is that virtually no one (crucially including the Supreme Court) supports allowing yelling it in a fireless theater. The harm of allowing that would greatly outweigh the good. Thus, there is a legal limit on free speech. A similar approach applies to “arms”.

As to your desire for private citizens to own any weapon whatsoever with no restrictions, I’ll have to respectfully disagree... :-)