The 2nd re-visited

I don't know if the number of mass shootings in the US, defined as those with three or more fatalities, exceeds the number of days in the year to date as reported by some media outlets. But the number is so large that Republicans have stopped offering thoughts and prayers to the victims' families rightly fearing that the frequent repetition might make them sound indifferent and callous. The recent spate of shootings of unarmed non-belligerent individuals who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time by fellow-citizens who "felt threatened" has added another wrinkle to the situation. Before tackling the issue again, I decided to review my previous post of 4/16/21 and immediately found a glaring error - I misquoted the 2nd Amendment as saying "A well-organized militia...". The actual wording is "A well-regulated militia ...". In that post I wrote about the proliferation of gun ownership and how the "militias" were undermining the free State rather than securing it. I came to the conclusion that repealing the 2nd Amendment was the only option, no matter how far-fetched that idea may seem. I am now wondering why debate on the issue hinges on the right to keep and bear arms and not on the "well-regulated" aspect of that ownership. A reasonable person reading the 2nd Amendment may conclude that "well-regulated" is a precondition to ownership of arms. Not being trained in the law, I don't know if this aspect of the 2nd Amendment has been addressed in the numerous court cases on this issue. Proponents of gun-ownership are constantly lowering the degree of regulation without being challenged on this point. Red state Republicans continue to lower the minimum age, training, licensing and background check requirements. I believe that their undeclared goal is a society where everyone is armed with the best available firearms. Citizens not inclined to arm themselves would feel they have no other alternative since everyone else appears to be armed, increasing the likelihood that they would have to "stand their ground". They may even be persuaded that they should be the "good guy with a gun". Gun manufacturers are the only ones who are profiting from this situation. What is so hard to believe is that this is happening even though the majority of Americans is opposed to unfettered gun-ownership. "We the People" must take up this fight in earnest. Already, the number of shootings by a wide variety of assailants is so high that no one is safe in school, at work or anywhere else. A reader said in response to my 4/16/21 post, there would be no one left to vote for if Middle-of-the-roaders made repeal of the 2nd the litmus test. I am not convinced repeal is unachievable; after all, how many people thought Roe would be overturned? However, challenging the gun lobby on the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment seems like a good middle-of-the-road approach. It is certainly worth trying. Apathy, complacence and quiet desperation are not working and are tantamount to abject surrender without a shot being fired!