Gun Control Reform Activism

bill: No we can't confiscate all of the guns already in the wrong hands, but we can certainly take steps to strongly regulate who gets to purchase or otherwise own a gun, and where they can carry or use them.

As far back as I can remember regarding gun control debate (70's), gun control advocacy has only seriously contended that a marginal improvement is the best America could hope for in reducing gun violence.
Like a 10 - 20% improvement over gun murder & gun crime - well it's better than arguing to do nothing like wayne la-derriere & the gunnuts do.

bill: Like all other civil rights, the Second Amendment can be sensibly regulated to ensure the welfare and safety of the public at large

That's even the perverted subverted interpretation of 2ndA, which was manipulated by creepy scalia into an individual rkba (right to keep bear arms). The 1939 supreme court ruled UNANIMOUSLY 8-0 (one recusal for late arrival) for the militia interpretation, as did the amicus brief to the 1939 court.

1939 supreme court (their caps, not mine): THE CONSTITUTION AS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED GRANTED TO THE CONGRESS POWER
"TO PROVIDE FOR CALLING FORTH THE MILITIA TO EXECUTE THE LAWS OF THE UNION, SUPPRESS INSURRECTIONS AND REPEL INVASIONS; TO PROVIDE FOR ORGANIZING, ARMING, AND DISCIPLINING, THE MILITIA, AND FOR GOVERNING SUCH PART OF THEM AS MAY BE EMPLOYED IN THE SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES, RESERVING TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY, THE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS, AND THE AUTHORITY OF TRAINING THE MILITIA ACCORDING TO THE DISCIPLINE PRESCRIBED BY CONGRESS."
WITH OBVIOUS PURPOSE TO ASSURE THE CONTINUATION AND RENDER POSSIBLE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SUCH {militia} FORCES THE DECLARATION AND GUARANTEE OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT WERE MADE. IT MUST BE INTERPRETED AND APPLIED WITH THAT END IN VIEW. http://www.guncite.com/miller.html

Amicus brief from dept of justice, 1938, to supreme court 1939 re miller case:
That the foregoing cases conclusively establish that the Second Amendment has relation only to the right of the people to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes and does not conceivably relate to weapons of the type referred to in the National Firearms Act cannot be doubted.....
In the only other case in which the provisions of the National Firearms Act have been assailed as being in violation of the Second Amendment (United States v. Adams), the contention was summarily rejected as follows:
The second amendment to the Constitution, providing, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," has no application to this act. The Constitution does not grant the privilege to racketeers and desperadoes to carry weapons of the character dealt with in the act. It refers to the militia, a protective force of government; to the collective body and not individual rights. * * * http://www.guncite.com/miller-brief.htm