I agree with MLeakes last statement but here's the thing.
There are dangerous, highly unstable people who should NOT have easy access to weapons or ammunition. What changes or policy issues could make the general public safer is what gun owners or 2A supporters should discuss.
I'd heard that Jerrod Lautner, the young man who shot Rep Giffords in the head in AZ wanted to enlist in the US Army but was declined due to MENTAL issues. If he was so unstable he couldn't enlist wouldn't that be a "red-flag"?
I also heard the guy in the CO movie theater event(2012) was interviewed by a university faculty member who denied his admission & sent emails out warning other campus admin offices of the young man's behavior. That could be a red flag.
Emphasis added. Is a "dangerous, highly unstable" person rendered safe once denied firearms? Should such a person be free at all, with access to bats, knives, cars, gasoline and the means to make poisons and explosives?
What does a "red flag" mean? If the US Army doesn't want you because you have to touch your nose and turn around three times each time someone says "sir", do you immediately forfeit your constitutionally guaranteed liberties?
This country has courts and thousands of dedicated judges who put thought and experience toward weighing peoples' rights and interests correctly, and appointing appropriate guardians and conservators. I find the urge to bypass judicial protections unwise.