the next amendment, maybe

     If the people--the voters-- of the United States want to take guns out of private hands, they would need a constitutional amendment.  Gun advocates argue that the intent of the framers ( of our Constitution ) was that every citizen should be allowed to own a gun. I find the "intent of the framers " argument to be worse than spurious. The men who "framed" our Constitution were some of the plainest writers and clearest thinkers who have ever lived. Their intent is evident in their written words. They left us a written law, and the capacity to change that law when we disagree with it. What's there in plain words is " the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". We can't merely wish these words into something else--a dangerous precedent. We have written laws so that we are not subject to the whim of a king or potentate. We may never get all the way to "equality under the law", but without written laws, we would still be medieval.
    As for the "intent of the framers", what the people of the United States did, in 1775,  was to form militias that were illegal, according to the British government. The American Revolution began when these militias fought to defend their store of arms--guns and ammunition-- from confiscation by the British. We are taught to admire this, as part of the history of the freedom enjoyed by American citizens. But using it to advocate gun ownership would mean that paramilitary groups and neo-Nazi militias have the same rights those embattled farmers insisted on at Lexington and Concord.