No one wants "more firearms laws".
What most people want are laws that EFFECTIVELY REGULATE the ownership and use of firearms, with the goal of keeping them away from people who are likely to misuse them, and kill or injure themselves or someone else.
What about this do you find so impossible to recognize, and understand? What about it do you find so unreasonable and difficult to tolerate? We already do this with all sorts of deadly and potentially deadly machines. And there are no machines MORE potentially deadly than firearms. So why do you see regulating their use as being such an outrageous, or impossible a goal?
Of course, the Constitutional right of people to own and use firearms says nothing about regulation. The only mention in the second amendment of regulation is a well regulated militia, which means the militia, if and when created, is well regulated. The right of the people, all the people to own firearms shall not be infringed.
Having a machine of any type is not a Constitutional right.
The problem with your argument is that common sense regulation is always just a step in banning firearms. Why? Because no matter the regulation, people are going to violate it and do evil things, thus another step must be taken.
In this debate, it seems that the dead from firearms use seem to be more valuable and important than death from other causes, like automobiles. Those are taken as simply the price to be paid for transportation. No one is running around with their hair on fire demanding over, and over, and over again changes in that area. Since the 16 to 30 age group is responsible for many more accidents than any other age group, why not simply ban them from driving, or at least teenagers? Few care about the deaths caused by these people.
"Regulation" is always defacto restriction. When it comes to firearms, it is restriction from emotion, rather than fact.
If you listen to the gun banners, the AR15 platform is the most evil creation of man. You would think that it is used in every murder that occurs. The look of a rifle built on this platform terrorizes people, it must be banned.
The facts are that it is the most popular rifle, and most popular hunting rifle in the country, It has been used in fewer murders than other types of firearms, the last time the gun grabbers got it banned, the ban had no effect on the murder rate. The gun grabbers don't care about the facts, they care about the emotion and optics.
I find it incongruous that people who advocate for a person to be able to choose suicide, are enraged that a person chooses suicide by using a firearm.
If those who make this choice regarding their own body and their own life were removed from the death by firearm statistics, the total would be cut in half.
I do believe in commonsense firearms laws. However, until there is an effective information sharing method between government agencies, they cannot be effective.
All of the current firearms laws should be strictly enforced. Gun crime cases should not be allowed to be plea bargained by throwing away the use of a firearm.
Rigorous background checks should be ensured.
"training" as far as the basic safety aspects of firearms, which are simple, should be provided at the point of sale, probably by a short video then a quiz before the firearm is handed to it's new owner.
Draconian firearms laws do not make people safer. I can say this as an "expert witness", why? Because I spent 25 years working in law enforcement in what is now "the peoples republic of california", with the most draconian firearms laws in the country. Time after time after time firearms are removed from people who by law are banned from owning them. Time after time after time murders are committed by people who have an illegal gun and are banned from having one. Time after time people are murdered because they are following the law and have no firearm for defense when a predator with a gun, who laughs at the laws, kills them.
The supply of illegal firearms is abundant, and no law to date has eliminated it, Hell, if you have enough money, you can buy a very illegal fully automatic firearm.
So, ANY firearms law is specifically directed at the good citizen who follows the law, the good citizen who will suffer because of restrictions that effect his/her constitutional right. It can inly apply to the bad guy once the crime with a firearm has been committed.
The so called red flag laws are simply unconstitutional. The confiscation of someones property who is not an imminent threat, and the warrantless search of the home with no probable cause or due process is unconstitutional. You cannot punish someone first for a crime that never happened, on the unverified word of someone, then force the property owner to go to court for the return of his property which was seized on unconstitutional grounds.
I have confiscated firearms from people who at the time posed a direct threat, the most notable being a woman who shoved a pistol in my gut with intent to shoot me, but was pulling the trigger guard rather than the trigger out of nervousness. I have counseled people who might act out who owned a gun, I have asked a spouse to secure a firearm in the house, temporarily. I have never, under color of the law, confiscated a firearm from anyone who is not an immediate threat.
Considering these, I truly would like to see what you view as reasonable firearms laws.