As much as I favor strong gun control legislation, I've never felt the Second Amendment supported my position. Just my bad luck. If I could, I'd change the amendment.
But for the longest time, the Second Amendment really was the only provision of the Constitution that came into play in the gun control debate. Now we have a new wrinkle:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, having ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment does indeed protect the right of an individual to bear arms, will hear arguments in a Chicago case that this constitutional protection applies not only to federal laws and federal jurisdictions (such as the District of Columbia) but also to cities and states.
At issue now is the 14th Amendment, which limits states from enacting laws that essentially subvert federal law. The amendment was passed after the Civil War to prohibit Southern states from writing up laws that would effectively deny full rights and freedoms to the newly emancipated slaves.
As so often happens, the Supreme Court's decision in the Chicago gun case could have wider ramifications, as nicely explored in this article at reason.com, a generally smart libertarian journal.