The second amendment isn't just to defend from invasion it's primary purpose is a check against oppression.

"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."

I hear this argument a lot, but the second amendment wasn’t written so people could defend themselves against criminals: it was written so the States could field a military force to defend the nation without having to maintain a standing Army. A lot of things have changed since 1787. We now have a standing Army the lines of which the Founding Fathers never dreamed and Guard and Reserve have taken up the duties formerly the responsibility of the local militia. That said, I’m not one to support grabbing guns, but I can support better gun laws.

Is there an argument out there to "band" the Second Amendment? Is this is reference to something specific?

However, keep in mind that MOST of the other "First-World" nations (similar to the US), have much more strict gun control laws and there aren't a bunch of criminals killing innocent law-abiding people with any more regularity than in the US - in fact, most of them have lower homicide rates than the US.

If your pro-gun argument is based on homicide rates and violence, it will fail. The only was the pro-gun argument wins is by playing the "Constitution" card and ignoring everything else.

As for freedom, the United States SAYS it's big on it, but recent studies by independent groups show that the US isn't even in the Top 10 nations for individual freedom.