Actually, I don't think the discussion is a waste of time - remember, not long ago concerns were raised over state control (fees/permits) over ammunition and primers, etc.
I suppose that the conversation going on might hinge on how you define the word "bear"...
You have a constitutional right to "bear" arms...
what precisely does "bear" mean in a legal sense: bear where? bear when? (bear how?)
The matter of constitutionality might, as NavyLT notes, be more clearly debated if the fee for a permit were raised to ludicrous levels -
say something like $20,000 for the permit.
You may have a constitutional right to bear arms, but if you cannot afford the administrative fee levied by the state to do so, then the "right" is moot.
(When is a constitutional right not really a right? When you can't afford it?)
It would certainly seem that an argument could be made that permit fees being required for something that is defined as a "right" are dubious at best.
You have a constitutional right to freedom of religion. Would you pay a required (State) permit fee to join a church?
If, on the other hand, you agree that an administrative fee established by States is legal, so long as it is reasonable, why then you're only dickering over the price of it...
say somewhere between .01c and $20K.
(And, once you agree to that, the State is free to raise the price over time...)
