Do you believe that the Second Amendment is arcane?

[cris01us]

To judge the 2nd Amendment in terms of "Do we really need this today, anymore" seems rather myopic. Who knows what the future will bring and what kind of a world our children or grandchildren will live in. 

[cris01us]

It always blows my mind how blindly and willingly the American people accept that mass shootings just happen once in a while because the founding fathers wrote a vague sentence on a piece of paper some 250 years ago.

Constitutions are supposed to provide a framework for the government's actions. A constitution is supposed to be a very practical document. In the United States, however, it has become a sacred text, as the founding fathers have evolved into godlike figures with a superior moral authority that never existed in reality. That is why the US constitution is rarely changed or even amended, unlike the constitutions of most other democracies.

I understand that the fundamental scepticism against the government and a general focus on the individual is part of the American culture. But the second amendment is, just like many other parts of the US constitution, impractical and must be changed.

How should it be changed?  What other parts [like many other parts of the US constitution] should be changed?

[cris01us]

For example by simply in implementing a sentence that allows the federal government to regulate the arms market as long as it still allows people to defend themselves properly.

The strict separation of powers in the United States, which has its roots in the creation of the United States and the fear of a over-powerful government, produces political stalemates that are unique in the west. Every western democracy knows separation of powers, but not to such an extent. It is clear that the judiciary, which decides on the constitutionality of the laws, must be independent, but there is no need for congress to work against the president and vice versa.

Thomas Jefferson himself stated: "No society can make a perpetual constitution ... The earth belongs always to the living generation and not to the dead .… Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years."

It is thus useless to follow the guidelines of some men 250 years ago who formed to US constitution in a way to prevent threats that were ultimately prevented - that is the transformation of the United States into some form of elective monarchy.

All interesting and valid points, and put very succinctly.  I wonder if you might tease out how separation of powers might be changed and what the consequences of that (positive and negative) might be?