I think it is safe to say that the only way the Supreme Court is going to "fix" the gun problem in the country is if we end up with a court majority who support using the court to legislate. I am not a proponent of guns, but in terms of legal interpretation, that is the way I would understand it. It is a legislative issue and it therefore requires a constitutional amendment.
At the same time, I admit that the Supreme Court has not always forbidden itself from taking legislative actions. The gun cases always pass by 5 - 4. So, maybe one "Correct" new member is all you need.
Right now, the Heller case from 2008 is a good statement of where we are. It is unconstitutional to:
Ban handguns;
Forbid having a fireable gun in the home;
Possibly? require a license to have a gun in the home.
The most recent case on the subject was New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022). The main addition made by this case was to hold that it is also unconstitutional to require a special need in order to get a concealed Weapon Permit.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)
Facts - Dick Heller is a D.C. special police officer. He applies to register a handgun to keep at home, and his application is refused on the grounds that D.C. does not allow handguns. The District also has a law requiring any gun kept in the house to be either disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock. Heller sues to have both provisions declared unconstitutional. The District court throws out his complaint, but the Appeals court finds in his favor holding that the right to have a handgun, and the right to have it in your home assembled are both constitutionally protected. D.C. appeals it to the Supreme Court.
Holding - The Supreme Court agrees with the Appeals court.
Key Arguments - Right is given to people while militia was only a subset. Therefore, Militia is irrelevant to the right to bear arms.
A decision to abandon the 2nd amendment would be a legislative decision, not a legal one.