That Constitutional point however is overused. The second doesn't give you the protection you think it does. It is really concerned more with militias and the like. Personal private gun ownership is in the hands of the State if I'm not mistaken. I believe even the Supreme Court agrees on that one. So you could have a gun ban without even touching the 2nd Amendment, technically. I'm not advocating that as a realistic achieveable goal, I'm just saying.
I disagree, since the second Amendment extends the right to bear arms to the people since it declares: "a well-regulated militia as being necessary to the security of a free State and prohibits infringement of the right of the people to keep and bear arms."
If it was only militias and "the like", it would have read: "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms".