Well, one could take the whole "well regulated militia" thing seriously. Or one could say that "arms" was never intended to refer to weapons capable of killing many people in a short time, which is how it has been interpreted with respect to bombs and chemical weapons.
Failing that, sure, it would be nice if people could actually think the way the founders did, and seek a collective solution. But in a country where large numbers of people absolutely insist on the unrestricted ability to cause mass death, the only possibility is that the Constitution really is a suicide pact.
Maybe in the future “well regulated” will mean that a president creates a “National militia” or deputizes anyone with a lawful firearm and no one else can buy a gun outside of the militia. Of course this militia would be right wing but I guess dictatorship is how it could end.
Back then well regulated meant equipped. English has evolved over time. Of course if one day we had six liberal judges they might use the modern meaning of regulated.
Failing that, sure, it would be nice if people could actually think the way the founders did, and seek a collective solution. But in a country where large numbers of people absolutely insist on the unrestricted ability to cause mass death, the only possibility is that the Constitution really is a suicide pact.