2nd Amendment Form a Militia


PDA






tpaw
November 15, 2008, 03:08 PM
With the threat of Obama taking away our gun rights, I was wondering what it would take for all of us, including pro gun organizations, to form a legal militia? By doing so, we would be in keeping with the 2nd amendment in both categories, a militia, and the right to bear arms. Think about it!

If you enjoyed reading about "2nd Amendment Form a Militia" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
freakshow10mm
November 15, 2008, 03:15 PM
1. We already are the militia.
2. The SCOTUS already ruled the Second Amendment is a right of individual citizens and not the collective militia. Militia membership means nothing.

tpaw
November 15, 2008, 03:20 PM
1. We already are the militia.
2. The SCOTUS already ruled the Second Amendment is a right of individual citizens and not the collective militia. Militia membership means nothing.


Please elaborate, I'm not quite getting it?

JImbothefiveth
November 15, 2008, 03:28 PM
Please elaborate, I'm not quite getting it?The court ruled that gun rights are not dependant on being in a militia.

freakshow10mm
November 15, 2008, 03:29 PM
The citizens are the militia.

Look up Heller v DC. The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right.

Federal law defining militia also states that membership in such militia does not entitle one to any more or less rights than anyone else.

In other words, your idea of forming a militia so we can keep our firearms rights is unnecessary as it will be a waste of time.

The Bushmaster
November 15, 2008, 03:52 PM
tpaw...Refer to my post in "Legal"...

Realbigo
November 15, 2008, 03:53 PM
If you are really that worried about it, alot of states have sanctioned "Defense Forces" that affilated w/ but independent from the NG. Heres a link to Va's
http://www.vdf.virginia.gov/

MikePGS
November 15, 2008, 04:33 PM
the militia is defined as "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act." according to the Militia act of 1782. So for a lot of people they already are legally considered the militia. (Surely women, minorities and older people could theoretically sue to be included citing discrimination if they were to inclined). However, Heller ruled that even in spite of that, individuals have the right to possess firearms. Historically, the Bill of Rights is simply a document that recognizes inherent rights that every person is born with and therefore doesn't need to have them granted to them by a governing body. Some of the founding fathers found these so important that they basically made the document so that the government would stay out of these affairs relating to these ten rights. Sadly, modern people like to be cute and try to interpret what is essentially engraved in stone.

The Bushmaster
November 15, 2008, 05:41 PM
I prefer 18 to 60 because we live longer these days...

JWarren
November 15, 2008, 05:51 PM
Correct on the count that we are already the milita. No point in joining anything.

However...

In the terms of joining any type of militia group, I MAY have at one time considered joining one that was aligned with my views AND operated in a legal and above-reproach manner.

But I re-thought this a while back.

When you join ANY group like that, you tie your fate to the most idiotic member of that organization. Its never the intelligent, rational, and decent members that mess up. Its that one guy that talks a good enough game that he slips in and then does something SO idiotic that you all become targets by association.

I learned this when I was planning on joining a fraternal organization a while back... until I saw one of the most disreputable persons I knew and found out that he was a member. There is no way that I would tie my name and reputation to that person.


In short, be careful as to what you join. When you join anything, you tie your fate and reputation to the lowest calibered person of that organization.



-- John

Jeff White
November 15, 2008, 06:15 PM
The only "legal" militia is provided for in both state and federal law. Any other paramilitary organization and/or training is illegal in over half of the states. The states have the right to regulate military organizations. See Presser v. Illinois.

X9ballX
November 15, 2008, 06:38 PM
the right to a militia was made to protect the people from a tyranicle government. the second amendment will never be needed til it is taken away thomas jefferson said that.....i think

armedandsafe
November 15, 2008, 07:26 PM
I prefer 18 to 60 because we live longer these days...

(Surely women, minorities and older people could theoretically sue to be included citing discrimination if they were to inclined).

I am so inclined.

I can't run my 4 miles in 30 minutes, climb 14 foot walls, abandon perfectly good airplanes at 30,000 feet, nor fell Babe the Blue with one blow to his forehead, anymore. However, I have still have the skills and patience to lie in wait for the wily predator and reach out and touch him a loving tap.

When a deer who has been shot at that day stops and feeds within 20 feet of me, I know some of my skills are still good.

I AM a militia. Just ask the spanish speaking fellows who thought pickings would be easy, way out here in the country. Don't sell us sneaky, onery, vindictive, little-left-to-lose old pharts short.

Pops

rbernie
November 15, 2008, 08:40 PM
tyranicleIs that one of them fossilized dinosaur testes?

tpaw
November 15, 2008, 08:41 PM
In short, be careful as to what you join. When you join anything, you tie your fate and reputation to the lowest calibered person of that organization.

Good point.

X-Rap
November 15, 2008, 08:49 PM
Today 02:33 PM
MikePGS However, Heller ruled that even in spite of that, individuals have the right to possess firearms. Historically, the Bill of Rights is simply a document that recognizes inherent rights that every person is born with and therefore doesn't need to have them granted to them by a governing body. Some of the founding fathers found these so important that they basically made the document so that the government would stay out of these affairs relating to these ten rights. Sadly, modern people like to be cute and try to interpret what is essentially engraved in stone.

There it is again "Heller" yesterday I walked down the mainstreet in my town with an AR in hand and pistol in my pocket. Who can say they have done the same on Pennsylvania Ave. in DC. Heller was a start but until somebody can say they can go about freely, while armed today is not much different than the day before Heller.
I agree about the definition of Militia but also that the Various States have thrown some restrictions on that. Try drilling 1,000 armed men in a field without the Governors approval and see who comes asking questions.

M ammo
November 15, 2008, 08:55 PM
I think the point of the thread is to block, any new, restriction from the newly elected.

Stating the formation of a militia a good idea.

I have questions on the same line of thought,, what if you could find a local law enforcement agency add you in as a reserve deputy of some sort?

Just a thought.

I can see militias forming again as they did after Waco, and some other events.

MikePGS
November 15, 2008, 08:57 PM
I can't run my 4 miles in 30 minutes, climb 14 foot walls, abandon perfectly good airplanes at 30,000 feet, nor fell Babe the Blue with one blow to his forehead, anymore.
If it makes you feel any better, I'm sure most people in this country can't :D (somehow, that makes me feel worse)

Try drilling 1,000 armed men in a field without the Governors approval and see who comes asking questions.
Honestly I guess that would depend on the state. Back when the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building was blown up in Oklahoma there were numerous reports about the "Michigan Militia" around here (Metro Detroit). In spite of all the coverage, to the best of my knowledge there was never any discussion about arresting them for anything. I bet in a lot of western states that would hold true to. Downtown San Francisco of course would be another story entirely. It probably helps to that a lot of it seems to be happening on private land.

X-Rap
November 15, 2008, 09:12 PM
Hey I think it would be great if every Sheriff in the country would start a serious reserve element and require real participation, unfortunately those guys are few and far between.
After 911 I said that would have been one of the strongest and cost effective ways to ensure homeland security and keep it out of federal hands by giving it to the 5000 plus county sheriffs.
Alot of us can't make those runs anymore but as said we can sit and wait and watch and know what to do when the time comes.
As for the Militias like that in Michiagan, they may not have gone in and broke them up but rest assured they were probably watched carefully and likely infiltrated. What happened to those guys?

M ammo
November 15, 2008, 09:29 PM
True any Sheriff that would do it would be hard to find.
But cost effective for them.. In the long run.
I know liability will be the lynch pin. On that question.

357wheelgunner
November 15, 2008, 09:29 PM
Hey I think it would be great if every Sheriff in the country would start a serious reserve element and require real participation, unfortunately those guys are few and far between.
After 911 I said that would have been one of the strongest and cost effective ways to ensure homeland security and keep it out of federal hands by giving it to the 5000 plus county sheriffs.
Alot of us can't make those runs anymore but as said we can sit and wait and watch and know what to do when the time comes.
As for the Militias like that in Michiagan, they may not have gone in and broke them up but rest assured they were probably watched carefully and likely infiltrated. What happened to those guys?

I'm 25. Most of the "men" I went to High School with are walking around 20 lbs underweight or 100lbs overweight, wearing bell bottom pants (or whatever other failed syle from 20+ years ago is currently "in") talking about their feelings and "hugging it out" when they get into fights. None of them know how to shoot a gun, but they can work their $400 cell phones and ipods just fine. Our current generation of warriors is lacking, I think most of them would vomit at the thought of a fist fight, much less the idea of running drills to use violence to enforce law and order.

If the Sherriff did something like that, I'd be all about it, but I'm betting I'd be the youngest one there by 10 years.

goldie
November 15, 2008, 09:38 PM
Quote (I'm 25. Most of the "men" I went to High School with are walking around 20 lbs underweight or 100lbs overweight, wearing bell bottom pants (or whatever other failed syle from 20+ years ago is currently "in") talking about their feelings and "hugging it out" when they get into fights. None of them know how to shoot a gun, but they can work their $400 cell phones and ipods just fine. Our current generation of warriors is lacking, I think most of them would vomit at the thought of a fist fight, much less the idea of running drills to use violence to enforce law and order) This is true; my neighbors kids are grossly overweight,about 20 yrs old,rarely lifted a snow shovel,never washed a car,the only physical activity is lifting a forks to their mouths.young adults today are so out of shape & soft it isnt funny.let them try to march with a 9lb rifle & pack, they would be hospitalized by the end of the day.....

rbernie
November 15, 2008, 09:43 PM
The only "legal" militia is provided for in both state and federal law. Any other paramilitary organization and/or training is illegal in over half of the states. The states have the right to regulate military organizations. See Presser v. Illinois.Nobody seems to be taking you up on this, so I'll paste an excerpt of the decision:

The right voluntarily to associate together as a military company or organization or to drill or parade with arms, without, and independent of, an act of Congress or law of the State authorizing the same, is not an attribute of national citizenship. Military organization and military drill and parade under arms are subjects especially under the control of the government of every country. They cannot be claimed as a right independent of law. Under our political system they are subject to the regulation and control of the State and Federal governments, acting in due regard to their respective prerogatives and powers. The Constitution and laws of the United States will be searched in vain for any support to the view that these rights are privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States independent of some specific legislation on the subject.



ETA - You may think that Presser v. Illinois and its predecessor United States v. Cruikshank are terrible decisions; steaming piles of statist dung that nobody could possibly love. It doesn't matter. They define the legal status of militias.

M ammo
November 15, 2008, 09:45 PM
I don't know about the young guys,
But I did 20 in the Army, As an FO
and am an active 3 Gunner.
I'm what the won't or what the worry about.

tunnug
November 15, 2008, 10:00 PM
If you want to join an organization that will work towards gun rights look and see if your state has a chapter of the Citizens Defence League, here in AZ we are a group of volunteers that keep an eye for any legislation that tries to limit gun ownership, there is also volunteer gun lobbyists in washington pushing for pro-gun laws, plus they won't bug you about donations.
www.azcdl.org

hso
November 15, 2008, 11:20 PM
First off, you're going to get 0 traction on the idea of getting people to join some sort of unorganized (not state sanctioned) militia.

Second, there already are state militias in every state that are sanctioned by the state government. The bear the name ... Defense Force or ... Guard or something along those lines.

Third, "taking away our gun rights" is an oversimplification. Heller established that the 2nd is an individual right and not a state's right. Restrict, limit, that's possible, but it has already happened in states like NJ and California where they have AWBs in place and in states like NC, IL and others where you have to get permission to purchase firearms and/or ammunition. Where we are now is pushing state and local politicians to change their restrictive state laws and court challenges to force them to so that the limits of "reasonable restrictions" can be decided.

paramedic70002
November 16, 2008, 09:07 AM
Speaking of state militias, the VA Defense Force in particular...

I considered joining. I could work in their medical unit. I have always regretted not serving in some capacity.

They have recently been airing commercials in some sort of membership drive. They mention "less than lethal security" as one of their training areas.

Seems to me they don't trust their members with weapons.

taprackbang
November 16, 2008, 09:42 AM
..training is illegal in over half of the states...

First off, you're going to get 0 traction on the idea of getting people to join some sort of unorganized (not state sanctioned) militia.

The 2nd Amendment was written roughly 300 hundred years ago, but the State Guard was not formed until some 200 years later.
How was a 'well regulated militia' referring to something nearly 200 years later? Easy; the militia is the common people.

To the guy who started this thread:

The above quotes from the moderators should disturb you. The 2nd Amend NEVER referred to a State Guard, but merely to every able bodied man between ages of 18 - 60.
The moderators may be close to asserting that all Government is God, or the close equivalent. And I derive this from their quotes from above. Well, government is run by MAN and is fallible, as we've seen time and again. That is the reason for the 2nd.

rbernie
November 16, 2008, 10:06 AM
Taprackbang - I think that you misunderstand the mods' position. The point is not to argue the semantics of 'militia', because I think that most here would agree with the common understanding of 'all able-bodied men within a reasonable age range'.

The issue is whether there is legal standing to organize an informal militia in the absence of state or local authorization. The US Supreme Court says NYET to that notion, and that is the established legal precedent.

Regardless of how the mods or anyone else may feel on the topic, it is ill-advised to advocate behavior that may be illegal if conducted inproperly.

taprackbang
November 16, 2008, 11:34 AM
The issue is whether there is legal standing to organize an informal militia in the absence of state or local authorization. The US Supreme Court says NYET to that notion, and that is the established legal precedent.

The entire point was for our servant government to fear the people; not the other way around. When people fear the government, you have tyranny.

MaterDei
November 16, 2008, 11:49 AM
No offense toward those that might be members of state guards but if you want to be in the military then join the military. I witnessed some of these groups during my 11 year Army career and I can't tell you how silly they appeared. I could be totally off base but from a military perspective they were no more capable than the Salvation Army. On the other hand, if their mission is not military in nature then ditch the uniforms and ranks.

Just my uninformed $.02 worth.

BullpupBen
November 16, 2008, 12:17 PM
I personally think this is a great idea, but I believe that the best way to go about creating militias is to focus on local, small groups,(i.e. you and your shooting friends) instead of a massive MILITIA, that has a chain of command and actual funding,which is illegal, and sounds more like the National Guard.

I guess the easiest and by far safest way to go about creating a 'militia' would be as follows:
1. get together your good shooting buddies,
2. gather once a month or so at the local shooting range and safely practice small team drills and shooting drills,
3. come up with a simple set of standard operating procedures,
4. know the geography of the area you live in,
5. promote firearms safety and RKBA awareness in your community.

Just imagine what would happen if RKBA advocates did this in every county of every state, (where permitted by law.). We would end up with a "militia" composed of hundreds upon thousands of tiny, completely unconnected cells. This way, an official citizen military organization, with a chain of command and funding, would not and could not exist, so it wouldn't violate the Supreme Court's decision in Presser vs. Illinois.


I think that is the practical answer to this thread, not to mention the easiest and best for the RKBA in the long term.

To the ops original question:
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426)

marsofold
November 16, 2008, 12:52 PM
Anyone joining any private militia group known to the government will have a big surprise waiting for them the next time they travel by plane. They will find that their name has been added to the list of people the government considers "suspicious", and that they are now delayed and practically strip-searched when they fly. And that it is IMPOSSIBLE to ever get their name removed from the list. All of the significant "militias" have been infiltrated by big brother Homeland Security.

Jeff White
November 16, 2008, 12:57 PM
the right to a militia was made to protect the people from a tyranicle government. the second amendment will never be needed til it is taken away thomas jefferson said that.....i think

The entire point was for our servant government to fear the people; not the other way around. When people fear the government, you have tyranny.

No, the militia was created to provide a force defend the country (including the government) without the dangers to freedom posed by a large standing army. The militia has always been part of the government, not a check on the government. The militia has always been a force that is called out by the chief executive of a duly elected government.

During Shay's Rebellion, the government called out the militia to put down the insurrection. The militia is a force that would be used to keep the duly elected government in power. It never has been a check of any kind on the government.

Where in the constitution does it say that Captain Billy Bob of the Macon County Dragoons is empowered to call up his unit and march on the county courthouse, the state capitol or Washington DC if he sees the duly elected government doing things he deems unconstitutional? It doesn't. The constitution only empowers the government to call up the Macon County Dragoons (or any other militia unit).

We the people are the final arbiters of what's constitutional and what's not. But, the founding fathers have given us a framework and procedures in which we do that.

The United States Supreme Court has stated that the court has the final say as to what's constitutional and what's not. See Marbury v. Madison. So how is it that we the people are the final arbiters of what's constitutional? Quite simple, we the people elect the president who appoints justices to the court, and we the people elect the senators who confirm those appointments and put the justices on the bench.

We the people elect the congressmen and senators who write the laws. We have all kinds of input. We just don't choose to use it. And then people get on gun forums and talk big about forming militias when things don't go their way. I suppose that it makes some people feel better to think that themselves with their trusty SKS and a few close friends are a check on the government, but in reality private militias are so insignificant the government seldom bothers to enforce the laws against them in the states that have them. Believe me, it's not because they fear they'll start the next revolution by enforcing those laws. It's because private militias aren't a threat to anyone but themselves. When they do get to the point they become a threat they are crushed and the survivors jailed. Google CSA, Covenant Sword and Arm of the Lord for an overview of what happens when the government has enough of a private military organization.

States with Both Anti-Militia and Anti-Paramilitary Training Laws (7)

-Florida. FLA. STAT. ANN. ch. 870.06, 790.29.
-Georgia. GA. CODE ANN. ss 38-2-277, 16-11-150 to -152.
-Idaho. IDAHO CODE ss 46-802, 18-8101 to -8105.
-Illinois. ILL. REV. STAT. ch. 1805, para. 94-95.
-New York. N.Y. MIL. LAW s 240.
-North Carolina. N.C. GEN. STAT. ss 127A-151, 14-288.20.
-Rhode Island. R.I. GEN. LAWS ss 30-12-7, 11-55-1 to -3.


States with Anti-Militia Laws Only (17)

-Alabama. ALA. CODE s 31-2-125.
-Arizona. ARIZ. REV. STAT. ANN. s 26-123.
-Iowa. IOWA CODE s 29A.31.
-Kansas. KAN. STAT. ANN. s 48-203.
-Kentucky. KY. REV. STAT. ANN. s 38.440.
-Maine. ME. REV. STAT. ANN. tit. 37-B, s 342.2.
-Maryland. MD. CODE ANN. art. 65, s 35.
-Massachusetts. MASS. GEN. L. ch. 33, s 129-132.
-Minnesota. MINN. STAT. s 624.61.
-Mississippi. MISS. CODE ANN. $ 33-1-31.
-Nevada. NEV. REV. STAT. s 203-080.
-New Hampshire. N.H. REV. STAT. ANN. s 111:15.
-North Dakota. N.D. CENT. CODE s 37-01-21.
-Texas. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. s 431.010.
-Washington. WASH. REV. CODE s 38.40.120.
-West Virginia. W. VA. CODE s 15-1F-7.
-Wyoming. WYO. STAT. s 19-1-106.


States with Anti-Paramilitary Training Laws Only (17)

-Arkansas. ARK. CODE s 5-71-301 to -303.
-California. CAL. PENAL CODE s 11460.
-Colorado. COLO. REV. STAT. s 18-9-120.
-Connecticut. CONN. GEN. STAT. s 53-206b.
-Louisiana. LA. REV. STAT. ANN. s 117.1.
-Michigan. MICH. COMP. LAWS s 750.528a.
-Missouri. MO. REV. STAT. s 574.070.
-Montana. MONT. CODE ANN. s 45-8-109.
-Nebraska. NEB. REV. STAT. s 28-1480 to -1482.
-New Jersey. N.J. REV. STAT. s 2C:39-14.
-New Mexico. N.M. STAT. ANN. s 30-20A-1 to -4.
-Oklahoma. OKLA. STAT. ANN. tit. 21, s 1321.10.
-Oregon. OR. REV. STAT. s 166.660.
-Pennsylvania. 18 PA. CONS. STAT. s 5515.
-South Carolina. S.C. CODE ANN. s 16-8-10 to -30.
-Tennessee. TENN. CODE ANN. s 39-17-314.
-Virginia. VA. CODE ANN. s 18.2-433.1 to -433.3.

Forming or participating in a militia in any of the states listed makes you a criminal there. Once you do that your freedom is totally at the discretion of the government because you have broken the law.

The feds have usually gone after militia members for weapons violations as treason is a hard case to make. There is no federal law against private militias, but Presser v. Illinois certainly opened the door for one. This law was introduced in May of "Domestic Insurgency Act of 1995:

Amends the Federal criminal code to impose a fine and up to ten years imprisonment on whoever knowingly participates in a paramilitary organization. Defines a "paramilitary organization" as two or more individuals acting together, organized in a military or paramilitary structure, who knowingly: (1) possess firearms, explosives, incendiary devices, or other weapons or techniques capable of causing injury or death; or (2) provide or participate in training in the use of any such weapons or techniques with the intention that they be used unlawfully to oppose U.S. or State authority or for any other unlawful purpose."

Nothing stands in the way of congress passing similar legislation. However, they have enough tools in the Patriot Act to move on private militias any time they'd like.

You all can go ahead and talk militias and insurrection all you want. But now that I've explained how illegal it is, you can't do it here on THR, because we don't condone any criminal acts.

Ultimately the choice is yours.

X9ballX
November 16, 2008, 01:08 PM
our founding fathers always said we are ther militia. there will be an uprising if this becomes an anti gun contry

Kevin108
November 16, 2008, 01:09 PM
Please elaborate, I'm not quite getting it?
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
- George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution

The Bushmaster
November 16, 2008, 01:17 PM
Jeff White...Then when and how do we orginize and stand against a tyrantical government not of our choosing? That is the main reason we have the 2nd Amendment is it not?

By The Way...I don't mean to say we have a tyrantical govenment yet.

Jeff White
November 16, 2008, 01:27 PM
Then when and how do we orginize and stand against a tyrantical government not of our choosing? That is the main reason we have the 2nd Amendment is it not?

When you are ready to take the same risks the founding fathers did. They knew good and well what they were getting into when they organized the American Revolution. They knew in advance that they would be considered traitors and would lose their freedom, their families' freedom, they personal fortunes and quite possibly their lives. Many of them were wealthy men with substantial estates and businesses to lose.

They took these actions only after years of negotiation and attempts to resolve their differences with the Crown through normal channels of redress failed. Many of them had prices put on their heads. Many lost everything they had, watched family members languish and die on prison ships, some served long sentences themselves.

So it will be time after you are ready to become a criminal, abandon your family, your fortune and forfeit your life.

Considering the advancements we've made in the last 20 years, shall issue concealed carry, more and more gun ownership, expiration of the Clinton AWB , Heller.....I don't think any rational person can say we've reached the point where we can't work within the system, because obviously we can.

ZombieHunter
November 16, 2008, 02:56 PM
+1 to Jeff's post

When you are ready to take the same risks the founding fathers did. They knew good and well what they were getting into when they organized the American Revolution. They knew in advance that they would be considered traitors and would lose their freedom, their families' freedom, they personal fortunes and quite possibly their lives. Many of them were wealthy men with substantial estates and businesses to lose.

They took these actions only after years of negotiation and attempts to resolve their differences with the Crown through normal channels of redress failed. Many of them had prices put on their heads. Many lost everything they had, watched family members languish and die on prison ships, some served long sentences themselves.

So it will be time after you are ready to become a criminal, abandon your family, your fortune and forfeit your life.

Considering the advancements we've made in the last 20 years, shall issue concealed carry, more and more gun ownership, expiration of the Clinton AWB , Heller.....I don't think any rational person can say we've reached the point where we can't work within the system, because obviously we can.

The Bushmaster
November 16, 2008, 03:42 PM
And I will agree with Jeff also. Wasn't trying to start a war here. Just getting what I already knew clarified...

Hopefully we can continue to enrich our firearms history in the next 4 years...

tpaw
November 16, 2008, 09:29 PM
"The only "legal" militia is provided for in both state and federal law."

Agreed. It was never suggested to form anything illegal or by any means counter productive to our present laws. I am a law abiding citizen and will always remain to be just that. I guess I was looking for an answer as to how we, as firearms enthusiast, can keep what rights we have left and not loose any more. I tend to agree with this post from a fellow enthusiast.
"Historically, the Bill of Rights is simply a document that recognizes inherent rights that every person is born with and therefore doesn't need to have them granted to them by a governing body. Some of the founding fathers found these so important that they basically made the document so that the government would stay out of these affairs relating to these ten rights."

X-Rap
November 18, 2008, 12:03 PM
My question is what would constitute paramilitary training? Is it legally defined?

ilbob
November 18, 2008, 12:23 PM
My question is what would constitute paramilitary training? Is it legally defined?Of course not. It is like most other feel good laws. Make it as broad as possible and let the courts figure out what it means.

I don't know that a whole lot of people have ever been prosecuted under these laws. As vague as most of them are, it would be hard to get a conviction that sticks.

OTOH, most of the so called militias almost invariably commit other crimes like selling drugs and weapons violations, so there is maybe no reason to charge them with violations of penny ante anti-militia laws.

Geno
November 18, 2008, 01:05 PM
Per MikePGS' post:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act."

Crap, I was discharged 3 years back and didn't even know it?! Where do I turn in my Red Ryder? <<Smirk>>

X-Rap
November 18, 2008, 08:55 PM
Then my question would focus on some of the intensive tactical and defensive training that is available. It would seem a little paramilitary wouldn't it?

catfish101
November 18, 2008, 11:19 PM
I wouldn't think anybody could say anything for people getting together to train. Self defence training is available just about anywhere. I would think that there are millions of veterans that didn't forget their training or that could remember very fast if they needed or wanted too. If several of those guys got together to practice back up I don't see how that could be a problem.

I agree with some others on the fact that some of the militias that are around today are involved on other things.

If you enjoyed reading about "2nd Amendment Form a Militia" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!