Don't be so sure. Sooner or later, there will be a definitive Sup Court case about the meaning of the Second Amendment.
If the Left/Kerry types get their way then it will be declared that it protects a collective right, and is therefore completely meaningless. With such a ruling, don't discount the ability of the Left and their allies in the Media/Hollywood/Academia to ram that message down the throats of Americans. Who knows, after several yrs people may accept the ruling as sound, despite its absurdity, then they may be willing to give up a right that the Court says they never really had anyway.
If the original intent is upheld, then it shall be said that it protects an individual right making bans like those that exist in D.C. and Chicago difficult to justify.
Effective December 15, 1791
Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
PREAMBLE
The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
Good point. But have you noticed that John F'n Kerry has been silent on gun rights this year? Gun control hurt the Democrats in the 2000 election, and contributed to the Republican takeover in 1994. The lamestream media has pushed gun control for years, but it hasn't worked. Doesn't Kerry strike you as too risk-averse to try to push for gun control?