Why? Guns have been regulated before without a constitutional amendment.
The Bruen case turns a lot of it on its head.
Semi auto rifles account for a tiny fraction of gun deaths. The large majority occur from semi auto pistols. I don't want to get shot, but would take a 5.56 round from an AR over getting hit with a 10mm hollow point from a pistol.
If we really want to save lives, then it has to be a robust effort on mental health, storage laws, combating drugs (fentanyl deaths alone are staggering), increase punishment for drunk driving, etc.
We can save lives on multi fronts where the constitution and case laws won't hamper the effort.
Mag bans do nothing. I can shoot using 10 round mags at almost the same rate as a 30 round (shoot 9 rounds keeping one in the chamber and drop and insert and repeat. State bans won't stop a shooter from driving over a border to buy mags in a non-restricted state.
i don't think a confiscation ban would hold up. I do think robust background checks (and not just a one time check, it could be a system that constantly checks), storage laws, training, etc. And have harsh punishment for providing easy access to guns used in shootings with protection if you lock your guns up.
The Nashville shooter would not have been able to own guns if there were robust (repeat robust) red flag laws (needs to be nationally implemented).
When you realize that the staggering supermajority of mass shootings are done by people with mental issues, why is that not the focus? Keep guns out the hands of deranged people.
With the number of guns in this country, a semi auto rifle ban will do nothing to save lives.
I don't see the problem ever getting solved, but there is a lot we can do to make it very difficult for people with mental issues from getting guns.