If you'd like some reading that presents the facts about the history and context of the second amendment, I suggest
A People Armed and Free: The Truth About the Second Amendment. The guy offers a disclaimer that he does believe the 2A supports an individual right. However, he presents both sides, with full text quotations, not the partial texts that are often offered from BOTH sides.
Your suggestion that you can not tell who or should not have a gun is somewhat well founded. It's true that you cannot pick out the guy with the flawless background (investigated via the FBI) that will someday use that firearm to commit a crime. The same can be said for the guy that will eventually drive his car into the front of a building and kill the mother buying a coffee at 7-11. You've probably heard this before, but I'll say it again. The outright ban of firearm ownership from law abiding citizens in an urban setting leaves you with a defenseless population against a defensive criminal front. Criminals get weapons. They don't go through an FBI investigation to get them.
Also, to suggest that an armed populace is not a deterrent to a tyrannical takeover, well, history says otherwise.
And even if you disagree with all of these things, I have one more question. Why are you so quick to take away what I enjoy so much? I shoot more in a month than most people do in their whole lives because it's FUN. Across all disciplines: trap, skeet, sporting clays, high powered rifle, rimfire target, steel plate pistol, practical pistol, bullseye pistol, cowboy action renactments, the list goes on.
The 'gun rights' folks are one of the few 'activists groups' that never wanted to CHANGE anything. We want to keep what we have. That has been the stance since the beginning. Why can't you just leave us alone? These laws are treating a symptom of the criminal leniency in this country, not the underlying problem. Let's kill unborn children, but let violent criminals skirt the death penalty. Let's 'reform' inmates so they can be let out and turn them into repeat offenders.
There's a reason the political left chose 'assault weapons' as their term of endearment for the target of choice in their continued infringement on civil liberties. I have asked a number of legislators in New Jersey why they feel the need to ban modern firearms. Their answer is that they have never heard of such a ban.
'Assault Firearms' are nothing more than MODERN firearms. The so called 'evil features' do not make it any more lethal. 'Why do you need a flashhider?' Because when I shoot at night matches, I don't like being blinded by the first shot. Ignore the fact that flashiders do nothing to hide the flash seen by the TARGET. That would be too rational.
'Why do you need a pistol grip?' Ever seen a good hunting rifle? They have thumbhole stocks. Remove some wood, and you're left with a pistol grip.
'Why do you need a bayonet lug?' Why the fuck not? How many people have been bayonetted by a dude with a firearm?
Come on people. Start thinking for yourself. Stop asking 'why do you need....?' Start asking 'Whats the problem with having...?'