Unless you think our founders scribbled random words on a scroll without forethought, the intention of the Second Amendment is clear: It’s about the right of each state to form a militia. It doesn’t say anything about owning firearms, because the arms belong to the militia. You just “bear” them.

(And speaking of bears: although people in the late 1700s had to hunt for food, that is no longer the case. Most people who hunt these days consider it sport. I’ll agree when the bear carries a weapon; competing teams use equivalent equipment).

Post-Revolution militias were considered preferable to a standing army. That’s why, “the same First Congress that approved the Second Amendment limited the national army to 840 men." That’s why participating in a state militia was the obligation of every able-bodied man; that’s why the feds were prohibited from taking away those arms.

Whatever happened to that tiny army? Well, the military is a great place for the masses to blow off steam – if they’re not in prison – and military expenditures are a great money-maker for certain corporations. By the way, should a demagogue manage to turn the armed services against the citizenry nowadays, good luck against tanks, missiles and drones.

But I digress. The “right to bear arms” never had anything to do with self-defense, hunting or maintaining law and order on our streets – or in our movie theatres, churches, concert halls, clubs or schools.

If you still have any doubts, Chief Justice Warren Burger said as much: “The Gun Lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies – the militia – would be maintained for the defense of the state… The Second Amendment doesn’t guarantee the right to have firearms at all.”

Yet, every time we whisper about gun control, even after a full-fledged tragedy, gun lovers trot out the bogus Second Amendment argument. Because the American mania for guns is so intense, it’s willing to allow human sacrifice to satisfy itself, and then call it a “right.”

Weapons are, most likely, an antidote for feeling unempowered (and an easy “keep them dumb and happy” tactic by leaders while they garner votes and profits). How about we focus on truly empowering these people, Democrats?

I’m not saying no one should own a gun (although that would be fine). But, since there’s no actual right to ownership, guns ought to be treated like cars. We make laws to protect the common good: age limits, health considerations, licenses, written tests, period eye exams and registration fees! Any county could require a $5,000 annual fee per weapon. Gun ownership would probably drop fast. Just saying.

If that’s not to your liking, my warmest condolences and sympathy.