It prevents us from doing the responsible thing.

The Constitution is about general rights. You don't want to have to keep amending amendments whenever an old weapon technology becomes obsolete or a new one enters the market. We need specific LAWS, passed by Congress to ban, say, assault weapons (we had this once, but it was not renewed.)

That said, I'd be happy to repeal the Second Amendment altogether.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

....Wonson's ruling established the "historical test", which interpreted the amendment as relying on English common law to determine whether a jury trial was necessary in a civil suit. Applying the historical test in Parsons v. Bedford (1830), for example, the Supreme Court found that jury trials were not constitutionally guaranteed for cases under maritime law, an area in which English common law did not require juries. The Court further clarified this rule as a "fixed historical test" in Thompson v. Utah (1898), which established that the relevant guide was English common law of 1791, rather than that of the present day.[16] In Chauffeurs, Teamsters, and Helpers Local No. 391 v. Terry (1990), the Court explained that the right to a jury trial provided by the Seventh Amendment encompasses more than the common law forms of action recognized in 1791 (when the Bill of Rights was ratified), but rather any lawsuit in which parties’ legal rights were to be determined, as opposed to suits which only involve equitable rights and remedies.[21]

-------

The 7th Amendment provides a right of jury trial in suits at "common law". However, what is meant by suits at common law is fixed, by longstanding precedent, to legal actions that would have been cognizable by English courts of common law in 1791.

Notwithstanding a very unusual Swiss air-rifle, which was not a firearm, semi-automatic repeating rifles and pistols were unknown in 1791.

That will take at least 2 new Supreme Court judges. In the meantime we need to make ammunition impossible to purchase and possess. Tax it, regulate it, pass draconian laws with severe penalties for illegal possession and manufacture of ammunition. The ATF has been given great powers within the justice department as part of the homeland security act. What part of "homeland security" is more important than preventing the most common form of terrorism, mass shootings?
President Obama needs to come out hard and fast with a bold plan, I hope he is thinking along these lines.

I think it would contribute to a weakening of the current Union...and I'm a Cascadian Secessionist!

A repeal of the 2nd Amendment at federal level would leave state constitutions' similar (and often much more explicitly worded) provisions intact. In most states, nothing wold change. But it would make it easier for states in which there is a strong desire to make sweeping changes to make those changes...

A patchwork of radically different gun laws could be a real problem (although I don't think more than a handful of states would make massive changes, and they'd be largely concentrated in the Northeast). But it's not a problem I mind much (see above).

about taking guns away from citizens.

Or rather, don't do one without doing both.

And even then, I think this isn't a 2nd Amendment crisis; it's a crisis of people with too much money and time on their hands violently chasing and financing fantastical visions of an alternate reality which will never come to fruition, but will harm lots of innocent people in the process.

The reality is, the second amendment will NEVER be repealed or altered.

The reality also is, governments may regulate the ownership of arms and will still be in compliance with the second amendment (Scalia said that in a binding opinion).

So pass laws requiring licensing to own a firearm, a separate license for each firearm, and proof of insurance for each firearm. Well regulated gun ownership. This also has the effect of extremely inexpensive liability insurance for each firearm as there are over 300,000,000 of the things for the insurance pool.

The worst and most ineffective legislation would be something similar to the ill fated "Assault Weapon Ban".