The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. Folks have been grasping at straws for many years, trying to abrogate that simple right. The simple answer is, if you don't like it, change the Constitution. O, and good luck.
The gun control issue is often compared to society's control over automobiles. Why should we regulate guns less than cars? The numerous regulations involving automobiles are well known: age restrictions, speed limits, operator licenses, tags, taxes, etc. This is an unfair argument, since automobiles are not protected by the constitution, but on closer inspection, the argument can actually be stood on its head, believe it or not. Here's the question: Can you presently own the biggest, most powerful, ugliest automobile in the world and legally operate it upon your private property without license, tag, or operator's license? Apparently, the answer is yes. This is not true for a gun. In other words, guns are more regulated than cars. Nobody seems to appreciate that. Now, we should ask, why are guns (which have constitutional provisions) more regulated than cars (which do not)?