I don't support civilian gun ownership, so I don't think I am the best person to discuss what's pragmatic or not.

I will give you a real world example from where I live. You think Ukraine having an armed citizenry would have stopped the Russian invasion? Such a claim is preposterous. You need APCs, tanks, artillery, fighter/bombers, anti-air, industrial drones, ballistic missiles, helicopters and a highly sophisticated and expansive arms industry. Armed militia isn't going to cut it.

Even the arguement that gun ownership would have benefit for preparedess is weak. You would need mandatory military service and an intense reservist program not some random who likes the feeling of firing a gun. Not mention sophisticated weapons, military vehicles and so on.

But enough about Ukraine. In the US context, arguments about pragmatic approaches are IMO (from my time living there) irrelevant. My reasoning can be explained by the following question:

Can anyone in America (criminals, the mentally ill, regressives) procure a large amount of weaponry with relative ease (with no background checks) as long as they have a modicum amount of organisational skills and moderate resources?

Yes or No?