The odds of genocide happening in the foreseeable future in the United States is extremely low, while the odds of more mass murders is extremely high.
It is true that the cultures in the prevented third world countries from developing technology for self defense, but in this age of asymmetric warfare had allowed even culturally and industrially undeveloped people to conduct self defense wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.
This is not a question of regulations that diminish previous interpretations of the second amendment. It has already been diminished, and rightly so. We HAVE weapon control, and it will not go away. What is left is to determine where to draw the line between the right to bear arms and the right to public safety. It is not unusual for different freedoms to conflict with each other. It is time to look at the current balance between our rights and freedoms.
What is the "foreseeable future"? Did the Germans foresee the Holocaust when the Jews were disarmed? This nation has racism, bigotry, hatred, and violence in its history and at its core.
Not being able to see the possibility of genocide in the future is only a comment on the limit of your vision.
What what freedoms are in conflict on this issue? You wrote, "It is not unusual for different freedoms to conflict with each other." I am sure you believe that to be true, but it is a result of a fundamental understanding of our freedoms under the Constitution. Those rights exist almost entirely as proscriptions on the powers otherwise granted to government. In other words, it is VERY, VERY unusual for "different freedoms to conflict with each other," but, to show me wrong, since you believe "it is not unusual," is there any chance you could point to three such conflicts?