Disclaimer: Making a Constitutional argument in no way implies my support of the U.S. Constitution. If you offered a strict Constitutional government to take the place of what we have now, I would take it in a heartbeat. But I think we can do better.

We should repeal the Second Amendment. As Sheldon Richman has pointed out, there is nothing unclear about the wording. The preamble to the Bills of Rights sets out its purpose: "The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. Despite this, its language is being using to restrict the right to keep and bear arms."

What would the consequence of repealing it be? Nothing. It would not give the government any more power to restrict the right than it has now. This would be instructive to the pro victim disarmament crowd who along with most Americans and many conservatives are ignorant of the (purported) purpose of the Constitution. It will show them that the whole Bill of Rights is redundant and that the general government only has those powers enumerated.