The point to placing restrictions on a right is to prevent that right from infringing on the right of another individual. Your right ends where his nose begins, an so forth. "Yeah, there are restrictions on the first amendment," I say when I have to defend the second amendment, "you can't make up and spread lies about a person or organization (trust me, the irony is lost on them) just because you have free speech, we made laws against libel and slander to protect other individuals."

The only laws that have a constitutional pass to "infringe on a right" are the ones that prevent you from using some right to harm someone else. That's why I support laws that restrict the second amendment. E.g. a law that makes it illegal for someone to shoot someone else in a non-lethal part of their body for no reason, a law that makes it illegal to use a firearm to end someone else's life in some circumstances. In other words I support laws against assault and murder (but unlike most news agencies, I don't consider non-gun murder to be less of a crime).

If they want to make a strong argument they need to show me where, outside of the 2nd, a the right of an individual is restricted for some reason other than to protect the rights of another individual.