“The Second Amendment is about protecting your right to go deer hunting the same way that the First Amendment is about protecting your right to publish poetry.”

1961, Address to ANPA
Context: Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed — and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment — the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants" — but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
This means greater coverage and analysis of international news — for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security — and we intend to do it.

In Miriam Bensimhorn, Advocates: Point and Counterpoint, Laurence Tribe and Robert Bork Debate the Framers' Spacious Terms, LIFE magazine, Fall 1991 (Special Issue).

The First Amendment and the Obligation to Peacefully Disrupt in a Free Society (22 October 2011), Blog Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/occupy-wall-street-bloomberg-free-speech-right-to-disruption-_b_1026535.html at huffingtonpost.com

“The Wrong Response to Holtzman”, New York Times, Dec. 30, 1987

We would not uphold an unconstitutional statute merely because the Government promised to use it responsibly. [...] The Government’s assurance that it will apply [a statutory provision] more restrictively than its language provides is pertinent only as an implicit acknowledgment of the potential constitutional problems with a more natural reading.
United States v. Stevens, 559 U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1577 (2010) (Opinion of the Court).

Concurring in New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971).

And it is addressed, in particular, to speech critical of the government.
New York Times (July 19, 2012)
2010s

On gun control in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings
Blasting the myths http://www.rachelmarsden.com/columns/vtech.htm By Rachel Marsden. Published Toronto Sun, April 23, 2007

On the need for Second Amendment supporters to remain vigilant about gun rights in the United States, from his recorded speech http://www.guns.com/2012/11/10/attorney-alan-gura-gun-rights-policy-conference/ to attendees of the 2012 Gun Rights Policy Conference.