The absurdity of the US firearm permissiveness is derived from the deliberate misreading of the 2nd amendment.
Prior to the sudden insistence on the new interpretation in the 1970’s, the amendment had never had a “guns for everyone” meaning. City governments everywhere often banned carrying firearms in town, knowing it would be a safety hazard.
The purpose of the amendment was well known to guarantee the right of states to enable militias. That would never have been in doubt anyway in the northeast, but the main need in slave states was to have slave patrols to prevent rebellions and catch runaways, and there was fear in these areas that the patrols would be disarmed by Congress if there were a majority opposed to slavery.
The wording was clear enough without mentioning slavery or southern states. The 2 clauses in the sentence stated the intended militia purpose first, followed by the “ right to bear arms”
Even disconnecting the two halves of the sentence still leaves the phrase “right to bear arms”. Bearing arms did NOT simply mean “carrying a gun around.” It implied a military purpose, being part of an organized group authorized to provide security. A true originalist Justice would note and acknowledge that.
Former Justice Warren Burger said “the Second Amendment “has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
“The very language of the Second Amendment,” wrote Burger, “refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires. … The Framers clearly intended to secure the right to bear arms essentially for military purposes.”
Former Justice John Paul Stevens agrees, and suggests that the amendment should be repealed. That would be difficult, but with a rational Supreme Court, it could be interpreted correctly.