I'm curious about how we make the distinction between reasonable limitations and infringement.
In another thread, I saw it argued that threatening a person because they are saying something you don't like isn't simply an issue of making threats, but is actually a suppression of free speech.
I've heard it argued many times that regulations on where you can carry your gun or how you go about obtaining a gun are violations of the 2nd amendment. Other people may argue that these are simply regulations, while a person still has a right to own a gun in their own home.
Suppose a given right is theoretically allowed, but in practice are severely restricted? For example, suppose you are allowed to own a gun, but you must keep the ammunition in a separate room of the house, and you are not allowed to take your gun off of your property unless it is in a locked box? In this case, you are still allowed own a gun, but you are limited to carrying it outside of your own property.
Every right comes with limitations, but when those limitations make it effectively impractical to exercise e those rights, do those limitations become an infringement?