Here is the article, titled Chicago’s ban on gun ranges challenged in court

“This case really hinges on what kind of limitations the state can impose on gun rights,” Josh Blackman, a teaching fellow at the Pennsylvania State University School of Law, told TheDC. “There is this notion that the right [to keep and bear arms] isn’t so important, so you can burden people to have to travel outside city limits.”

And although Blackman acknowledged the DC v. Heller case recognized a city’s authority to impose “competency requirements,” the question now is determining what falls in that category. The city of Chicago, says Blackman, went too far and ended up treating the right to bear arms more like a privilege.

“How should this constitutional right be treated as compared to other constitutional rights?” said Blackman. “No other right is treated this way.”

“The Second Amendment is kind of turned on its head,” Blackman added. “It’s like ‘okay you have this right, but how do you make sure other people don’t get hurt?’ The only focus is on minimizing potential damage, and with others [rights the focus is on] maximizing liberty.”

I am riffing a bit about the most dangerous right and the constitutionality of social cost. I think the argument plays well in this context.