Not much of the current personal arms policy debate in the US is about whether we should strive to make it impossible for criminals or civil rights activists to

Not much of the current personal arms policy debate in the US is about whether we should strive to make it impossible for criminals or civil rights activists to get a gun. It's about the margins of ease, how that can or should vary by person, how capacity or type of weapon matters, legal exposure of different kind of carrying, and other matters that could reasonably fall under "well-regulated." For example, some people think a recent domestic abuse record should trigger a very high level of scrutiny for firearm purchases (or even continued possession). This isn't the sort of rule that would prevent anyone from committing a crime with a gun, perhaps not even an impenetrable wall for those with such records. But it increases the practical difficulty and compounds the crime (and risk) for certain cases. Margins matter -- seatbelts can't save all lives but they absolutely produce a safety margin.