The “well-regulated” phrase was interpreted by the Court in the context of being part of a (merely) introductory clause.
Same effect as excising. It means they intend to ignore it. Strict constructionism, just bring scissors.
But the phrase still has operative effect. That is why the Court held dangerous and unusual weapons can be banned because they aren’t the kinds of weapons that belong to a “militia” as conceived when the Constitution was drafted.
I’m not wholly convinced by the Court’s 2nd Amendment decisions but I do think there are many ways to implement gun control anyhow. Big question how effective proposed gun control laws will be, which is generally what I look at in these debates.
I’d also like to figure out how to do something when there are big warning signs that people don’t seem to do anything about. I don’t think it’s just because there is some right to firearms.