[robertpaulsen]

But libel and slander, though fraud, are speech, correct? There are plently of other examples where speech is regulated.

"Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is legal"

Not when there is none.

[William Tell]

robertpaulsen said: "There are plently of other examples where speech is regulated."

It is not the speech that is being regulated. Rather, there are consequences for intentionally and provably harmful acts. Just as there are crimes which involve the intentional use of firearms to do harm.

You would have us believe that the fact that criminals in prison are denied arms is somehow an indication that the Second Amendment creates a government power to regulate arms. It's nonsense.

[Peisistratus]

"But libel and slander, though fraud, are speech, correct? There are plently of other examples where speech is regulated."

Speech itself is not, but consequences are.

"Not when there is none."

That's a consequence after the fact.