I love your fact-filled replies. They make so much sense to everyone. NOT. Prove your point with the ACTUAL Constitution, if you can. Your previous post is so much intellectual tommyrot put together by a bunch of Constitutionally illiterate morons who violate their oath, to protect and defend the Constitution, every waking moment of their otherwise useless lives. Nor have you actually REFUTED any point that I have made. Could it be that you CAN'T? Hmmm. I'd wager a LOT on that!
prohibiting possession of anything based on what someone MIGHT do with it is prior restraint, which is outlawedYour point isn't in the text of the Constitution, isn't in the Federalist Papers, doesn't exist in statute, and has no historical or legal source in support. It's utterly and completely false, without any merit whatsoever.
You've never produced anything supporting it, you never will.