I don't see anything particularly troubling in there.
Guns may be regulated. That is a fact and should be obvious.
There is not and should not be completely unrestricted access to all manner of "guns".
I do believe that law-abiding citizens should have access to a vast array of powerful and completely unneccesary weapons.
However, those weapons are and should be "regulated".
Scalia simply says that guns are and should be regulated. He's right.
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.