In November my home state of PA went Red

[gejohnston]

24. We have had gun control since the founding

not always for the best reason, like why Florida banned open carry in 1893. The Gun Control Act didn't help the crime rate in the 1960s and 70s.
Yes, we did have a long discussion then. Unfortunately, it was less than a logical and rational discussion. The worst offenders were Piers Morgan and Wayne La Pierre. Morgan incapable of a cogent argument, and Wayne pulling out the video game canard and a "mental health registry", which disgusted me.
I'm a strong believer in strict scrutiny. If there is no valid evidence of a cause and effect, the restriction should not exist. That applies to everything.
There is no functional difference between an AR15 and a Ruger 10/22 with a wooden stock. ARs are popular target rifles in the US, Canada, and much of Europe. Even the UK has them, just modified. One thing about the NFA that should change is that a single shot rifle or shotgun with the wrong barrel length is regulated as a machine gun. No other country does that. Open carry is really a nonissue. It would be the regulation that serves no purpose. Simply "because I don't like it" isn't a good enough reason. I think smoking pot is a stinky nasty habit like tobbacco, but I support legalization.

While I think it is stupid for a number of reasons, at least in populated areas, I do open carry when backpacking. That isn't a federal issue.
SYG is a use of force law. Each state, mostly common law, varies. Florida's SYG is different than California's, or the UK's for that matter. For example, California's is common law and allows counter attacks, Florida's by statute does not.
Duty to retreat is unique to the US, even then in a minority of states. SYG simply means "no duty to retreat" if you safely can. Out of the self-defense shootings, or stabbings, I have looked at, I haven't found one where the defender didn't try to escape if possible. My biggest issue with SYG is simply the intellectual laziness and dishonesty of pundits and politicians. Here is a good overview on the subject.

Here is the dirty little secret about drum magazines. There is a reason why mall ninjas buy them, but military and cops don't use them. Outside of practicing clearing jams, they are a C note of junk. The Aurora shooter did more damage with a pump shotgun because the drum magazine caused a jam on the second or third round. That doesn't mean I think they should be banned, I just think they are stupid.

There are things that can be done that won't hurt responsible gun owners but could cut down on the misuse of firearms

Actually, responsible gun owners will be affected. It will not affect the gangs, the crazy people etc. Sandy Hook is very rare. Until then, two of the worst school shootings were in Germany. Of course, that has nothing to do with the regular mass stabbings in China. China's mental health system is very poor.
What will save lives? Better mental health access will help in the rare spree murder. Most of our violence is another issue. Most of it is gangs.
If you look at the correlation between income inequality, as measured by the GINI Index, and violent crime, you will find that it is greater than gun laws or anything else. The most violent cities in the world, two are in the US, have these in common.
gangs, extremes in wealth inequality, political corruption, poverty, crumbling infrastructure.
That is one reason why places like Mexico and Brazil have low legal gun ownership rates, stricter gun laws than the UK, have high murder rates. Countries with similar gun ownership rates to the US, although sometimes more regulated, are places like Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland.
Ending the drug war, closing the income gap, rebuild the cities as well as fixing roads and bridges will save more lives than any gun law ever will.