I’m not a constitutional expert by any stretch of the imagination. As a lover of words I am fully aware that they can be squeezed, massaged and twisted to mean different things to different people. As the Led Zeppelin classic goes.”’Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings.” But sometimes that process can become downright asinine; no more so than the discussion that ensues in the wake of the all too frequent mass shootings.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It does not read:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of a lone, demented, maniacal, homicidal, suicidal, psychopathic, lunatic bent on slaughtering as many innocent people as possible to stockpile and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
No part of ”well regulated” fits the most recent incident in Las Vegas. One cannot deny that something has to be done. Yet even those who dare to criticise the amendment are quick to point out, stating what has become a fashionable pre-amble, “Don’t get me wrong, I fully support the second amendment, but ….”
Eclectic social commentary with a chuckle and maybe a sting in the tail 
I think we have passed the point of any level of rationality, There is NO reason to not eliminate the second amendment, or at the least AMEND the amendment so it make sense.