@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:I don't see the phrase "any provision of this constitution can be made null and void with a good reason" in there...
That phrase acknowledges important government interests that the government has the legitimate authority to pursue.
I think I see the source of the confusion. There are two issues here. One is whether a restriction on a right can be justified as serving an important government interest. Another is whether a restriction prevents people from exercising their rights.
Bans on pistol grips are unconstitutional because they do not serve an important government interest.
What you are focusing on however, is the question of whether the exercise of the right is impeded.
In that light, the reason why bans on nuclear weapons are allowed is because those bans do not impede people's ability to defend themselves against criminals.