Who needs an AR? Um, you have a duty to have one

Status
Not open for further replies.

ID-shooting

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
693
Location
Dover, TN
Was having a melow debate with a decidedly anti at my desk today at work. He asked the same old tired question "why wouldbanyone need an AR?" My first quick reply was, "You don't need one, you have a duty to own one."

Seeing his now puzzled look I fired google up, showed him the Second Amendment. I focused him to the Militia clause of it. In the pulled up the site to U.S. law and let him read the make up of the militia. I asked him to tell me if he was in the militia, he thought and answered in the afirmative. Then I asked him to think back, did the initial minute men get thier guns from the government or did they bring thier own? I then asked him how he planned to be in the militia if it were called if he wasnt familiar with or was able to bring his own gun.

He left thinking it over.
 
The militia as defined by the Militia Acts of 1792 (about 6 months after the Bill of Rights) were temporary, but later made permanent in 1795, changed some in 1862 and 1865, and then replaced in 1903. The "militia" as defined by that act is now the National Guard. The original definitions are not current and not covered by current law. So unless your friend is in the National Guard, he doesn't fit the legal definition with the militia act that is current today.

Nobody has a duty to own an AR.
 
10 USC 311

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

So um, ya
 
The militia as defined by the Militia Acts of 1792 (about 6 months after the Bill of Rights) were temporary, but later made permanent in 1795, changed some in 1862 and 1865, and then replaced in 1903. The "militia" as defined by that act is now the National Guard. The original definitions are not current and not covered by current law. So unless your friend is in the National Guard, he doesn't fit the legal definition with the militia act that is current today.

Nobody has a duty to own an AR.
Where did you read this?
The Militia Act of 1903 CLEARLY states:

The reserve militia or unorganized militia, also created by the Militia Act of 1903 which presently consist of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who are not members of the National Guard or Naval Militia.(that is, anyone who would be eligible for a draft). Former members of the armed forces up to age 65 are also considered part of the "unorganized militia" per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code.[2]
 
Maybe be clearer in that we are unorganized, but militia none the less.

MR Happy, Idaho will have you.

Title 46. Idaho Code


MILITIA AND MILITARY AFFAIRS
CHAPTER 1
STATE MILITIA -- ORGANIZATION AND STAFF
46-103. STATE MILITIA -- DIVISION INTO CLASSES. The militia of the state of Idaho shall be divided into three (3) classes, to wit:
The national guard, the organized militia, and the unorganized militia. The national guard shall consist of enlisted personnel between the ages of seventeen (17) and sixty-four (64), organized and equipped and armed as provided in the national defense act, and of commissioned officers between the ages of eighteen (18)and sixty-four (64) years, who shall be appointed and commissioned by the governor as commander-in-chief, in conformity with the provisions of the national defense act, the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, and as authorized by the provisions of this act. The organized militia shall include any portion of the unorganized militia called into service by the governor, and not federally recognized. The unorganized militia shall include all of the militia of the state of Idaho not included in the national guard or the organized militia.
 
Hey there ID..I couldn't believe there was an anti here in the great state of Idaho but then I saw your in Nampa...Just kidding lol I'm in the magic valley. In all seriousness though a buddy at work just brought up that subject and we all agreed (thankfully I already own one) Thanks for posting the actual article !
 
The militia as defined by the Militia Acts of 1792 (about 6 months after the Bill of Rights) were temporary, but later made permanent in 1795, changed some in 1862 and 1865, and then replaced in 1903. The "militia" as defined by that act is now the National Guard. The original definitions are not current and not covered by current law. So unless your friend is in the National Guard, he doesn't fit the legal definition with the militia act that is current today.

Nobody has a duty to own an AR.
Wow! divide and conquer.

as the founding fathers wrote it We THE PEOPLE are the millita and have a duty to own a military serviceable firearm in case we are called up for the defense of this country from enemies both foreign and domestic.
 
The militia as defined by the Militia Acts of 1792 (about 6 months after the Bill of Rights) were temporary, but later made permanent in 1795, changed some in 1862 and 1865, and then replaced in 1903. The "militia" as defined by that act is now the National Guard. The original definitions are not current and not covered by current law. So unless your friend is in the National Guard, he doesn't fit the legal definition with the militia act that is current today.

Nobody has a duty to own an AR.
False. Militia Act of 1903.

Edit: seems I'm late to that party.
 
You know, I've never owned one an AR type rifle, never even wanted one. I'm more into revolvers and lever actions. But, I support anyone's right to own what they want. The government got no business telling law abiding folks what they can and can't do, when the Constitution says its OK.


As of recent, all this liberal BS has got me to thinking, a nice M4 would be a great addition. I might just have to get one, pick a liberal anti, and name it after them.
 
As of recent, all this liberal BS has got me to thinking, a nice M4 would be a great addition. I might just have to get one, pick a liberal anti, and name it after them.

I could post soooo many suggestions but it would be against THR policy. :)
 
You know, I've never owned one an AR type rifle, never even wanted one. I'm more into revolvers and lever actions. But, I support anyone's right to own what they want. The government got no business telling law abiding folks what they can and can't do, when the Constitution says its OK.


As of recent, all this liberal BS has got me to thinking, a nice M4 would be a great addition. I might just have to get one, pick a liberal anti, and name it after them.

^^^This (though I hasten to point out that there are libs who find this whole "control" movement repugnant, as well).

Any other non-AR owners planning on picking up a "Feinstein stick", just because, when the house kills her dream and prices/demand come back down?
 
I don't like the AR. Can I interpret the Militia Clause as my right to own anything I damn well please?
P.S.: As a liberal, I wholeheartedly embrace and promote the Second Amendment. A strong whole starts with a strong individual!
 
Tell them the AR is the culmination of many years of trial and error. The epitome of modern design and timetested efficiency to deliver firepower in a small light package. The world of guns has evolved in the last 300 plus years and so does with bad elements of society . The right to own one is necessary to ensure you have the best tool to defend your life , family and friends in the event public order goes heywire.

We are living in trying times. Even bad people are armed with the latest weaponry and they dont come in singles, they come in multiple persons . So an AR with a high cap is a must to fight against such multiple attackers like in a home invasion scenario . A six shooter revolver is good but can be a handicap limited by the number of bullets in the moment of utmost stress defending your very life. All you want at that very moment is to keep squeezing the trigger to stop the threats . The AR and Ak semiauto platform s are the way to go nowadays. Proven in combat the world over .
 
Most firearms evolution comes through military development of firearms. Just as the small crossover wagons/suvs are the evolution or the military Jeep, the AR is the current evolutionary stage of firearms designed to be rugged, reliable, simple and modular with excellent quality control to produce an easier to use rifle with more versatility.

A single gun can be purchased and by changing the top half for different calibers it can be used to shoot bottle tops to moving targets in competition, small game like rabbits to large game wild boar hunting, and it can be used to protect pets, livestock and homes. There literally is no more versatile rifle that allow an entire family to put one gun to so many different recreational, sporting, hunting and defensive uses. It is an American design with innovation and versatility designed into it. It is an American rifle supporting Americans in one of the few growing manufacturing fields in the United States. It is the American Rifle for this generation.
 
So Double Naught, does this pass your smell test? Curious to hear your reaction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top