No. It doesn't. Only the last 70 years or so. Do try and keep up.
Tell me, do you believe that people should be able to harass one another or commit libel and slander. (freedom of speech)
Direct demonstrable monetary losses from such. Still, it has nothing to do with the Fed Gov as that would be a power devolved to the States.
What about spread information on how to abduct and rape children? (first amendment)
Free speech is free speech. Only the results of actions should be considered. Or else we could all be someday thrown in jail for espousing an anti-socialist viewpoint on an open forum.
Do you believe that people should be allowed to own nuclear weapons? (keep and bear arms)
I've already stated my opinion on this one. As long as you are not causing anyone else damage, why not? If you are, then you should be prosecuted to the fullest exent. Also not relavent to the topic as this guy did not possess nukes.
We've always made exceptions at times because we acknowledge that society wouldn't be able to function if the government could not restrict some rights in favor of promoting societal welfare.
Bullsh!t. "Societal welfare" is a recent invention stemming from communism and other communitarian philosophies. It has nothing to do with the system of government the Founders envisioned. Ample proof is in their writings.
I could be wrong on this, but I don't believe that the Supreme Court has ever overturned a gun law on second amendment grounds.
They have. Check Findlaw for cases prior to Miller. Heck, even read the whole text OF Miller. It has only been since then that the USSC has refused to hear any and all Constitutional issues in regards to the Second. Silveria and Emmerson put two lower Fed Courts at odds on the issue, and it SHOULD force the USSC to hear it to resolve the difference. If they decide as historical precedent and Founders written intent dictates they should, 70 years of misapplied legislation would be whiped out.
This would be a good thing.