A Proposal to End Mass Shootings


β€œA 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.”

~ Second Amendment, β€œThe Constitution of the United States of America”

As is more than often true, many answers to seemingly modern problems can be found in transcendental principles – and in this case, the solution to the problem of mass shootings can be found in our Constitution. Strangely enough in this case, it arises from how progressive, anti-2A people misinterpret and misapply a section of the Second Amendment, the section addressing a β€œwell-regulated Militia”.

First, let’s get a few things out of the way – “well regulated militia” does not mean β€œslathered with laws and restrictions”, nor is it an avenue for β€œcommon sense gun control”. When one takes the time to research dictionaries and documents from the period when the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were being written, one can find the meaning appropriate to the time, the documents and the principle.

“Well regulated” referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. So a “well regulated militia” means an army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers that is well trained and well versed in their duties, roles and responsibilities. The Militia Act of 1792 further specifies that the β€œmilitia” is to consist of β€œπ’†π’‚π’„π’‰ 𝒂𝒏𝒅 π’†π’—π’†π’“π’š 𝒇𝒓𝒆𝒆 𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆-π’ƒπ’π’…π’Šπ’†π’… π’˜π’‰π’Šπ’•π’† π’Žπ’‚π’π’† π’„π’Šπ’•π’Šπ’›π’†π’ 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 π’“π’†π’”π’‘π’†π’„π’•π’Šπ’—π’† 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒔, π’“π’†π’”π’Šπ’…π’†π’π’• π’•π’‰π’†π’“π’†π’Šπ’, π’˜π’‰π’ π’Šπ’” 𝒐𝒓 𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒃𝒆 𝒐𝒇 π’‚π’ˆπ’† 𝒐𝒇 π’†π’Šπ’ˆπ’‰π’•π’†π’†π’ π’šπ’†π’‚π’“π’”, 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒆 π’‚π’ˆπ’† 𝒐𝒇 π’‡π’π’“π’•π’š-π’‡π’Šπ’—π’† π’šπ’†π’‚π’“π’”.”

As to equipment, the Act also specifies that:

β€œβ€¦every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, π’˜π’Šπ’•π’‰π’Šπ’ π’”π’Šπ’™ π’Žπ’π’π’•π’‰π’” 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒓, π’‘π’“π’π’—π’Šπ’…π’† π’‰π’Šπ’Žπ’”π’†π’π’‡ π’˜π’Šπ’•π’‰ 𝒂 π’ˆπ’π’π’… π’Žπ’–π’”π’Œπ’†π’• 𝒐𝒓 π’‡π’Šπ’“π’†π’π’π’„π’Œ, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.”

What type of weapons? Why within five years, every able bodied man must have a musket that is β€œmilitary grade” (and acquiring such supplies shall be free from taxation):

β€œThat the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 π’‡π’“π’π’Ž 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂𝒇𝒕𝒆𝒓 π’‡π’Šπ’—π’† π’šπ’†π’‚π’“π’” π’‡π’“π’π’Ž 𝒕𝒉𝒆 π’‘π’‚π’”π’”π’Šπ’π’ˆ 𝒐𝒇 π’•π’‰π’Šπ’” 𝑨𝒄𝒕, 𝒂𝒍𝒍 π’Žπ’–π’”π’Œπ’†π’•π’” π’‡π’“π’π’Ž π’‚π’“π’Žπ’Šπ’π’ˆ 𝒕𝒉𝒆 π’Žπ’Šπ’π’Šπ’•π’Šπ’‚ 𝒂𝒔 π’Šπ’” π’‰π’†π’“π’†π’Šπ’ π’“π’†π’’π’–π’Šπ’“π’†π’…, 𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒃𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒔 π’”π’–π’‡π’‡π’Šπ’„π’Šπ’†π’π’• 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒃𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 π’†π’Šπ’ˆπ’‰π’•π’†π’†π’π’•π’‰ 𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒂 𝒑𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.”

So, how does this fit into a time of modern problems?

Well, in retrospect, these problems aren’t really modern, now are they?

Colonists and early Americans were dealing with random, asymmetric attacks from a number of sources on the frontier – attacks that were a lot like the random shooters with which we seem we seem infected today.

What the 2A and the Militia Act of 1792 illustrate is a time when the defense and protection of the populace from harm was relegated to the individual (because there were no cops or SWAT teams to call – and no way to call them).

Would it not make some sense for a Militia Act of 2019 to include the formation of local militias that could be turned out at a moment’s notice (aka modern Minutemen) to saturate areas where suspected mass shooters are about and to encircle schools with a wall of protective lead? The Second Amendment clearly not only protects the individual ownership of firearms and ammunition without restriction, it actually promotes it and also implies that it is a duty of the populace to answer a call to arms when necessary – and the β€œwell-regulated” part assures that people who own firearms know how to properly use and care for them.

I’ve said it before and continue to believe it is true that the only possible way to counter asymmetrical threats – like terrorism or random, mass shootings – is through asymmetrical force.

This is that.

Is that crazy to think that way?

I don’t think it is. It certainly wasn’t in 1792.


5 thoughts on “A Proposal to End Mass Shootings

  1. Utah,
    The answer to your question is No!

    Being a rational person, I understand your post and accept your opinion, however
    when dealing with solipsistic, evil democrats that are incapable of rationalizing the
    truth due to their immature child mentality, we have to totally defeat them in their
    dealings with our political principles of established Constitutional Government.

    • Given that a militia was spelled out in the Militia Act of 1792, this isn’t supporting anything Democrat. Democrats say the 2A ONLY allows militias to own weapons, my point is that the 2A authorizes BOTH. Of course, the 2A doesn’t allow you to own a firearm, it forbids the government from stopping you from owning one.

      • Excellent article Utah.

        And the answer to your question is NO…. it is not only not a crazy way to think…. but it is the rational way to think. Both the 2A and the Militia Act of 1792 articulate the premise that the Militia is the citizenry.

  2. Utah,
    The democrats are the problem (as you point out). The democrats have ALWAYS
    been the problem, from the 1860’s to the present! The next ten years will determine
    if we will have to relive the 1860’s! History is screaming at us to wake up!

Leave a Reply to EdwardS Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.