It's a clear violation of the First and Fifth Amendments. It's a clear infringement on "the freedom of speech", and "of the press", as well as a violation of the takings clause, since an essential element of private property rights is the ability to contract for the disposition of . . . property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
The thugs in power today do not care about the rule of law. They have to be stopped, and gun rights are the line they cannot be permitted to cross.
And still Conservatives cling to the “rule of law” and bemoan the fact that the Communists in power don’t play by the rules.
NEWS FLASH: There is NO rule of law when one side believes that the ends justify the means. We are at war, and in war there is only one rule - Take no prisoners.
Conservatives who keep insisting that we remain with the GOP and reform the party from within are on a fool’s errand. How many times do we have to be told that the GOP does not want Conservatives? Sure, they want our money and our votes. But, they want us to shut up and take whatever they give us.
The government we have is what we deserve for repeatedly falling for the same old line and because the elected have ZERO fear of the people. War has been declared; start fighting back. War has been declared; start fighting back.
When the rule of law is dead and rule by the whims of men is the order of the day, there will be only one way to stop them. What would Michael Collins do?
We need to remember that it does not matter if something violates an amendment or not (even though if it violates an amendment then the violation becomes even worse): These proposed laws violate even MORE than those two amendments you mention.
The fact is that regulating ANY type of speech, particularly LOCAL speech, is NOT AN ENUMERATED POWER OF CONGRESS. Period. Congress may not regulate it at all. Just because it got away with version of that before does not justify it either.
And that was true even BEFORE the Tenth Amendment, which was added at the end of it all, when they did the Bill of Rights more as an EXCLAMATION POINT, than anything else, a DOUBLE reminder that Congress may not legislate on anything not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
So this proposal violates more than the amendments you mention.
It violates:
(1) the constitution itself,
(2) the 10th Amendment,
(3) the 9th Amendment (since we the people have an unalienable right to effective self defense (against both bad guys and despotic government), which means we have the right to engage in trade for the purpose of effective self-defense, even across state lines),
(4) the 2nd Amendment, and also as you point out,
(5) & (6) the 1st and 5th amendments.
Never forget to include the concept of enumerated powers when arguing against unconstitutional and bad gun laws.