Author Topic: What is a Militia?  (Read 20370 times)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
What is a Militia?
« Reply #270 on: November 30, 2007, 02:22:36 PM »
and...  I do not think that the court will hear on "who is the militia".   The ruling will be on once and for all explaining to those who have no concept of the written word that the founders indeed meant for it to guarantee an individual right.

That is what is in question here.   the lower court ruling was that having a firearm dissasembled or locked up made it not a firearm and thererfore infringed on the individuals right to keep and bear arms.

lazs

Offline Bingolong

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 330
What is a Militia?
« Reply #271 on: November 30, 2007, 04:22:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
and...  I do not think that the court will hear on "who is the militia".   The ruling will be on once and for all explaining to those who have no concept of the written word that the founders indeed meant for it to guarantee an individual right.

That is what is in question here.   the lower court ruling was that having a firearm dissasembled or locked up made it not a firearm and thererfore infringed on the individuals right to keep and bear arms.

lazs


Who knows maybe they will outlaw private militias. Maybe they will say.
Its the "State's" exclusive right to name its militias. The states say "our militia is the NATIONAL GUARD!" then you dont need to keep and bear arms to be in a militia.  Join something? have a commanding officer, training and arms? paid for and issued bye the gov? As I have said before you are not the militia anymore, you just refuse to acknowledge it. The "law" not the constitution requires you to be registered to be in a militia and your militia to be recognized by the state and it may just change again.

I assume you do not belong to any of these.

List of militia in the United States:

U.S. Federal militia forces:
United States National Guard
Naval Militia

U.S. States' militia:
Virginia Militia
State Defense Forces
Texas State Guard
New Hampshire Militia

Private militia:
California Militia
Michigan Militia
Indiana Militia Corps
Texas Emergency Reserve
Unorganized Hawaii State Militia
Ranch Rescue

So the simple answer is "Bingo, I'm not in one of those militias."
Or, "yes Bingo I belong to xxx"

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
What is a Militia?
« Reply #272 on: November 30, 2007, 04:27:08 PM »
then again , the state of florida may just say every one with a florida CCW is now in the florida militia. :D

Offline Bingolong

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 330
What is a Militia?
« Reply #273 on: November 30, 2007, 04:42:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
then again , the state of florida may just say every one with a florida CCW is now in the florida militia. :D


http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/apply.html
   
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0790/Sec06.HTM

ummm. :)

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
What is a Militia?
« Reply #274 on: November 30, 2007, 04:45:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
 for instance... you and I are part of the unorganized militia.


Is an unorganized militia a well regulated one?

Just playing devils advocate here--
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
What is a Militia?
« Reply #275 on: December 01, 2007, 10:18:13 AM »
Ok.. first of all..  they can't really rule on "unorganized militia" because no one can missinterpret that term.    They are not there to do so in any case.

holden.. the right is not dependent on being in any kind of militia.   It simply says that if you ever need one... it is great that we have the right to keep and bear arms so that you can draw from that pool... it is not a conditional right based on if you are in or if the country even need or even who is the militia.

An unorganized militia is simply the whole of the people and yes...  that is who you would draw from (when called or needed) to form an organized one.

As it stands now.. there are two defenitions of militia.. the organized one and the unorganized one.   they would have to change that but... even if they did... that would not mean that the states or the feds had the right to bar "the people"...  the citizens.. the right to keep and bear arms.

What this case is about is that DC has infringed... that DC has sidestepped the constitution by making a law that allowed you to keep and bear something that is not really a firearm.

The court ruled that it is an individual right.. the militia was never in question.. it never has been in SC cases on the second.. what was in question was weather a firearm all apart and locked and with no ammo was really a firearm and that if you were forced to do that with your firearm then were your rights to keep and bear arms infringed.

The court said yes.. DC was infringing on the second and that the second clearly was an individual right.

lazs

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
What is a Militia?
« Reply #276 on: December 01, 2007, 10:27:10 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
holden.. the right is not dependent on being in any kind of militia.   It simply says that if you ever need one... it is great that we have the right to keep and bear arms so that you can draw from that pool... it is not a conditional right based on if you are in or if the country even need or even who is the militia.


"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."

The reason stated for the non infringement of the inborn right to arm oneself is the necessity of a well regulated militia.  I understand that.  

The militia should be well regulated, not my right to keep and bear arms.  That is my interpretation.

I can also see the argument of those who wish to regulate my right, not the militia.  I think they are wrong, but I can see their argument.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
What is a Militia?
« Reply #277 on: December 01, 2007, 10:28:14 AM »
And to answer bingalongs question.. if he still doesn't get it...

I am not a part of any of the organized militias he sites.    I am however part of the unorganized militia as is every able bodied man here.

Try to read what bingalong is evading and you will see how utterly ridiculous his case is.. if the second was conditional on "the people" being only the militia.. and the militia defined as whatever the states and feds said it was... then it is just an amendment to allow the government to arm it's soldiers.

Taken further... once you were part of this so called militia.. you could never be disarmed.. you would not have to be on active duty and you could own any firearm and carry it that you wanted.

The amendment could have been made much simpler by saying that the state had the right to arm it's soldiers.. that is ludicrous and not worth mentioning.

nope.. "the people" and "infringed' mean exactly what they appear to mean.

You should not have to be part of a debate team to have free speech..  

I have here an analouge...

""A well-educated electorate being necessary to the preservation of a free society, the right of the people to read and compose books shall not be infringed."

Would that mean to you that only those who the government signed up to be in the education system could write or read books?

of course not.. it is silly.

lazs

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
What is a Militia?
« Reply #278 on: December 01, 2007, 10:34:37 AM »
holden.. you have it.. you are seeing the only logical way.   This is not just your opinion nor is it open for debate if you take it in context of what the founders intended.   Their intent is quite clear..

They did not mean for rights to be conditional.   The stated them so that the government would keep their hands off.

I think that if you read what the founders wrote then the intent is clear

   

        We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;
                ---Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.

        No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
                 ---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

    The thoughtful reader may wonder, why wasn't Jefferson's proposal of "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms" adopted by the Virginia legislature? Click here to learn why.

        They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
                 ---Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

        To model our political system upon speculations of lasting tranquility, is to calculate on the weaker springs of the human character.
                 ---Alexander Hamilton

    Quotes from the Founders During the Ratification Period of the Constitution

        [The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
                 ---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

        To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.
                 ---John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)

    John Adams recognizes the fundamental right of citizens, as individuals, to defend themselves with arms, however he states militias must be controlled by government and the rule of law. To have otherwise is to invite anarchy.

    The material and commentary that follows is excerpted from Halbrook, Stephen P. "The Right of the People or the Power of the State Bearing Arms, Arming Militias, and the Second Amendment". Originally published as 26 Val. U. L.Rev. 131-207, 1991.

        Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
                 ---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).

        Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
                 ---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

    During the Massachusetts ratifying convention William Symmes warned that the new government at some point "shall be too firmly fixed in the saddle to be overthrown by anything but a general insurrection." Yet fears of standing armies were groundless, affirmed Theodore Sedwick, who queried, "if raised, whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?"

        [W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
                 ---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

    The Virginia ratifying convention met from June 2 through June 26, 1788. Edmund Pendleton, opponent of a bill of rights, weakly argued that abuse of power could be remedied by recalling the delegated powers in a convention. Patrick Henry shot back that the power to resist oppression rests upon the right to possess arms:

        Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.

    Henry sneered,

        O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation...inflicted by those who had no power at all?

    More quotes from the Virginia convention:

        [W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
                 ---George Mason

    Zacharia Johnson argued that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression because:

        [T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.

    The Virginia delegation's recommended bill of rights included the following:

        That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

    The following quote is from Halbrook, Stephen P., That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right, University of New Mexico Press, 1984.

        The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.
                 ---Albert Gallatin to Alexander Addison, Oct 7, 1789, MS. in N.Y. Hist. Soc.-A.G. Papers, 2.

    Gallatin's use of the words "some rights," doesn't mean some of the rights in the Bill of Rights, rather there are many rights not enumerated by the Bill of Rights, those rights that are listed are being established as unalienable.

    Roger Sherman, during House consideration of a militia bill (1790):

        [C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded.
                 14 Debates in the House of Representatives, ed. Linda Grand De Pauw. (Balt., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972), 92-3.

Offline wrag

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3499
What is a Militia?
« Reply #279 on: December 01, 2007, 01:55:07 PM »
I put this link to this article elsewhere in another thread, but I think it sorta fits in here too.

Please keep in mind that much of what is contained within the article is the writers opinion but LINKS to articles that the writer believes give proof to his argument are contained within this article and THOSE are interesting...........


http://www.jpfo.org/smith/smith-is-it-too-late.htm
It's been said we have three brains, one cobbled on top of the next. The stem is first, the reptilian brain; then the mammalian cerebellum; finally the over developed cerebral cortex.  They don't work together in awfully good harmony - hence ax murders, mobs, and socialism.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
What is a Militia?
« Reply #280 on: December 01, 2007, 02:40:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
holden.. you have it.. you are seeing the only logical way.  


I apparently have a problem with that on many issues.  It seems to piss off some people.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24760
What is a Militia?
« Reply #281 on: December 01, 2007, 03:10:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
arlo... you are off in pot land I fear...  You are saying that you have paid enough taxes... taxes that were never intended by the constitution in the first place...

That you have paid enough taxes that you should get an M16 from the government?   I have paid enough taxes that the government should buy me a new vette... what is your point?

 


I don't smoke pot, darlin'. I'm just supporting the various "good arguments" here and offering a practical way to make the dream a reality. I'm really not sure why you feel threatened by that. It should give you a woody just thinking about it. :D

p.s. I like Garands, as well. I'm not into pizzing contests over whatever imaginary ownership of any particular gun inspires you to try to play. :aok
« Last Edit: December 01, 2007, 03:12:23 PM by Arlo »

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
What is a Militia?
« Reply #282 on: December 01, 2007, 03:36:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
holden.. you have it.. you are seeing the only logical way.   This is not just your opinion nor is it open for debate if you take it in context of what the founders intended.   Their intent is quite clear..

They did not mean for rights to be conditional.   The stated them so that the government would keep their hands off.

I think that if you read what the founders wrote then the intent is clear

   

        We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;
                ---Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.

        No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
                 ---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

    The thoughtful reader may wonder, why wasn't Jefferson's proposal of "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms" adopted by the Virginia legislature? Click here to learn why.

        They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
                 ---Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

        To model our political system upon speculations of lasting tranquility, is to calculate on the weaker springs of the human character.
                 ---Alexander Hamilton

    Quotes from the Founders During the Ratification Period of the Constitution

        [The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
                 ---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

        To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.
                 ---John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)

    John Adams recognizes the fundamental right of citizens, as individuals, to defend themselves with arms, however he states militias must be controlled by government and the rule of law. To have otherwise is to invite anarchy.

    The material and commentary that follows is excerpted from Halbrook, Stephen P. "The Right of the People or the Power of the State Bearing Arms, Arming Militias, and the Second Amendment". Originally published as 26 Val. U. L.Rev. 131-207, 1991.

        Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
                 ---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).

        Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
                 ---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

    During the Massachusetts ratifying convention William Symmes warned that the new government at some point "shall be too firmly fixed in the saddle to be overthrown by anything but a general insurrection." Yet fears of standing armies were groundless, affirmed Theodore Sedwick, who queried, "if raised, whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?"

        [W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
                 ---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

    The Virginia ratifying convention met from June 2 through June 26, 1788. Edmund Pendleton, opponent of a bill of rights, weakly argued that abuse of power could be remedied by recalling the delegated powers in a convention. Patrick Henry shot back that the power to resist oppression rests upon the right to possess arms:

        Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.

    Henry sneered,

        O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation...inflicted by those who had no power at all?

    More quotes from the Virginia convention:

        [W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
                 ---George Mason

    Zacharia Johnson argued that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression because:

        [T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.

    The Virginia delegation's recommended bill of rights included the following:

        That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

    The following quote is from Halbrook, Stephen P., That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right, University of New Mexico Press, 1984.

        The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.
                 ---Albert Gallatin to Alexander Addison, Oct 7, 1789, MS. in N.Y. Hist. Soc.-A.G. Papers, 2.

    Gallatin's use of the words "some rights," doesn't mean some of the rights in the Bill of Rights, rather there are many rights not enumerated by the Bill of Rights, those rights that are listed are being established as unalienable.

    Roger Sherman, during House consideration of a militia bill (1790):

        [C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded.
                 14 Debates in the House of Representatives, ed. Linda Grand De Pauw. (Balt., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972), 92-3.


Lazs,

Don't ever accuse me of writing a wall of words again. I am bookmarking your post for future reference... in case you do. :D :p

TIGERESS

Offline WWhiskey

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3122
What is a Militia?
« Reply #283 on: December 02, 2007, 09:13:45 AM »
:aok
Flying since tour 71.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
What is a Militia?
« Reply #284 on: December 02, 2007, 10:52:12 AM »
yep.. I admit that in order to make the point I had to quote a tiny amount of the writings of the time.    Look at who said these things.. you won't see... "arlo guthrie" or "phiniyus t hip" or "al gore".. these were the founders and it is indisputable what they meant.

By quoting them I had hoped to lay to rest the arguement of intent.

As for the militia... who cares?  the intent was also that it be the whole body of the people but...  even so... the "militia" is not a condition of a right just as education is not a condition of free speech.

lazs