Enough. Time to amend the Constitution. Let\u2019s begin the long cumbersome process of amending the United States Constitution to clear up the language on the right to bear arms, so the purchase and possession of weapons can indeed be \u201cwell regulated,\u201d the words that the famed \u2014 or infamous \u2014 Second Amendment to the Constitution uses to describe the militias of armed farmers that the founders envisioned protecting the nation from invasion, or overreach by the federal government. After last weekend \u2014 with two more in the long sickening line of \u201cactive shooter\u201d incidents in which some lunatic with a gun slaughters the innocent for no good reason \u2014 it\u2019s time for those Americans who are not excessively in love with guns to take steps to better protect themselves, and the rest of the general population. America needs protection from individuals who are mentally ill enough to go randomly shooting and killing total strangers, but can still easily get their hands on guns \u2014 not just on guns but on serious military weapons like the AR-15s that so frequently seem to be the weapons of choice among violent psychopaths. The Second Amendment to the Constitution, the heart of the argument so often used against stronger gun laws, says: \u201cA 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.\u201d A lot of things have changed since it was ratified in 1791. Back in the day, people lived closer to true wilderness where dangerous animals were abundant. People hunted for food. In some areas people were concerned that the continent\u2019s original inhabitants \u2014 from whom the land was, arguably, being stolen \u2014 might pose a threat to safety and security. Back then most people had firearms, and knew very well how to use them. Many of these things are true today for some people, but not the case for many others. Life has changed. It wasn\u2019t until the Civil War era that muzzle-loaders and single-shot guns began to be replaced in general usage by multi-shot weapons that don\u2019t need to be reloaded after each firing. In a world where everyone was armed, and nearly all guns had to be reloaded after each shot, a crazed individual with a firearm didn\u2019t have the same ability that today\u2019s psychopaths do to easily slaughter vast numbers of innocent people before being stopped. Today, a crazy person with an AK-47-type weapon can go to some public place like a shopping mall or a concert or school, start mowing down unarmed civilians, and keep it up until the police have arrived and somehow put a stop to it \u2014 probably by shooting the shooter. There are counterarguments. \u201cWhen guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.\u201d And if the government and its army have a monopoly on firearms, what is civil society\u2019s defense against the government? But gun advocates\u2019 image of armed civilians defending freedom against a renegade government is more a dangerous fantasy than a reasonable means to check government overreach. A more likely defense against some power mad chief executive being declared president-for-life is the army saying: \u201cNo way!\u201d People say the problem is mental illness, not the availability of guns. Well, both are certainly problems. But while gun control measures may be difficult to pass, there is simply no way to outlaw mental illness \u2014 leaving gun regulation as the way to reduce gun violence. The right of civilians to bear arms doesn\u2019t need to be taken away, but it does need to be limited \u2014 as are many other rights, from the right to drive to the right to vote to the right of free speech. Bearing arms should not be an unrestrained right. Something has to be done. With 29 fatalities from mass shootings last weekend at a Walmart in El Paso and a night-life district in Dayton, Ohio, the toll of people killed in shootings with three or more victims rose to over 57 so far in 2019 \u2014 with another five months of the year still to go. And the horror seems to be happening more and more. A database of mass shootings kept by Mother Jones magazine counts 114 shootings in which three or more people were killed since 1982. Including last weekend\u2019s El Paso and Dayton bloodbaths, the toll of those shootings is 932 people killed and 1,406 wounded. Private ownership and reasonable use of firearms by civilians need not be outlawed. But it should be regulated. Today, it\u2019s far too easy to buy guns, own guns, resell guns. The nation is awash in guns. These weapons are designed for the purpose of killing, and they shouldn\u2019t just be bought, sold and floating around like cars, lamps, radios, kids\u2019 toys. Guns should be regulated \u2014 more regulated. It\u2019s not an easy thing to do, amending the Constitution. Next year Americans will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the passage of another amendment, the 19th, giving women the right to vote. The women\u2019s suffrage movement dates back to the mid-1800s \u2014 the Seneca Falls convention viewed as a starting point of the women\u2019s suffrage movement in the U.S. took place in 1848. Women didn\u2019t get the right to vote until 1920. Yes, the right to bear arms is protected by the Constitution \u2014 in an amendment. And the founders wisely put in place a process for further amending the now revered document. With a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate, and approval of the amendment by three-fourths of the states, the Constitution can be changed, the Second Amendment can be changed. Far too easily, and too often, individuals who are both embittered and insane get their hands on powerful firearms \u2014 often military-style assault weapons \u2014 then go to some public place, and kill as many innocent strangers as they can. That\u2019s a problem that cries out for action. Let\u2019s amend the Constitution again \u2014 as has been done 27 times \u2014 and clarify that bearing arms is a right that needs to be well regulated.