Short answer: It depends on what outcomes you prioritize (reducing suicides, everyday gun crime, or mass shootings) and how you weigh those against individual rights and practical enforcement. In the U.S. context, many experts support more regulation in targeted ways rather than blanket bans.
What tends to have evidence of benefit with narrower burdens
•Universal background checks and closing private-sale loopholes.
•Permit-to-purchase or licensing with objective, shall‑issue criteria plus safety training.
•Waiting periods (cooling‑off) to reduce impulsive violence and suicide.
•Safe-storage/child‑access prevention laws; incentives or rebates for safes.
•Extreme Risk Protection Orders (red‑flag) with due‑process safeguards (clear evidence, short timelines, and penalties for abuse).
•Stronger oversight of dealers and trafficking (straw purchases, lost/stolen reporting, better tracing).
•Domestic‑violence prohibitions that include dating partners, with prompt removal options.
What is more contested or has mixed evidence
•Bans on specific models or features and magazine limits: may reduce mass‑shooting lethality but have less effect on overall gun mortality; politically and legally contentious.
•Broad “may‑issue” discretionary licensing: raises equity and civil‑liberty concerns and faces legal hurdles.
Principles that help balance safety and rights
•Be objective and evenly applied (clear criteria, fast processing, appeal paths).
•Focus on risky people and risky circumstances, not broad categories of lawful owners.
•Pair regulations with prevention: community‑violence intervention, mental‑health access, and economic opportunity.
•Minimize unintended harms (e.g., avoid criminalizing technical paperwork errors; offer amnesty windows and financial help for compliance).
If your goal is “more regulation, least rights burden,” a practical package could be: universal background checks; shall‑issue licensing with training; 3–10 day waiting period; safe‑storage standards with rebates; red‑flag orders with robust due process; tighter trafficking enforcement; and expanded community‑violence programs.
If you share your priorities (e.g., focus on suicide prevention vs. mass shootings) and jurisdiction, I can tailor a concrete, legally realistic set of policies.