Definition of "Militia" in Wikipedia

[rainbowbob]

In its original sense, militia meant "the state, quality, condition, or activity of being a fighter or warrior." It can be thought of as "combatant activity", "the fighter frame of mind", "the militant mode", "the soldierly status", or "the warrior way".

In this latter usage, a militia is a body of private persons who respond to an emergency threat to public safety, usually one that requires an armed response, but which can also include ordinary law enforcement or disaster responses. The act of bringing to bear arms contextually changes the status of the person, from peaceful citizen, to warrior citizen. The militia is the sum total of persons undergoing this change of state.

Persons have been said to engage in militia in response to a "call up" by any person aware of the threat requiring the response, and thence to be in "called up" status until the emergency is past. There is no minimum size to militia, and a solitary act of defense, including self-defense, can be thought of as one person calling up himself to defend the community, represented by himself or others, and to enforce the law.

Works for me. We are the miltia.

 

[mspurg]

Yes, very well put!!! I hope the Supremes see it that way!

 

[AStone]

"... the state, quality, condition, or activity of being a fighter or warrior."

Well said.

Well said, indeed.

 

[IllHunter]

Oh yea

Reminds me of my tag line!!!

"A militia when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, and render regular troops in great measure unnecessary."
Richard Henry Lee writing as "The Federal Farmer"

 

[Harley Quinn]

This is a good read and then you can follow it from there, it does go back to Spartan times in Western mentality, if you wish to read the bible it goes back even further.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushido

 

[Craig_AR]

Nice for discussion, but remember the reality of Wikipedia... articles there are just as accurate and just as authoritative as posts in THR. And you can count on the expertise and knowledge of Wikipedia authors no more, and maybe even less, than you can do so for THR posters.

When beloved daughter was in college, I explained to her why Wikipedia was not an allowed reference citation by most of her professors: Getting information from Wikipedia is the same as standing in the dormitory hallway and yelling out, "Does anyone know anything about ...?"
You might get an answer from a knowledgeable grad student TA teaching that course, or from a well-intentioned individual who thinks they remember what they might have heard in grade school on the subject, or the class clown who wants to see how much he can fool you before you throw a BS flag on the play, or a biased advocate who wants to push an agenda.

craig

 

[Harley Quinn]

Regarding wiki, it is mentioned by many, not a good location for information. I feel it is one that is now much better than it once was, similar to other locations of educational reading.

Your statements are your own opinions I would think, and like all of us we have them. Warrior is an interesting item and so is Militia, to consider all the people to fall into that line of thinking is pretty naive IMHO... The Constitution as it was written at first without the Bill of Rights was a "sad" document for sure.
We like to claim what a great item it was, without the Bill of Rights, it would not have lasted long I am thinking.

I have a firm belief that the slavery issue and the fact that the lack of any inclusion of womens rights is one, that will haunt us for a long time.

 

[mljdeckard]

Yes. Wikipedia is "The encyclopedia that says whatever it feels like today". It's fine to quick reference general information, but if I handed in a paper citing wik as a source, my professors would ding me for it.

 

[AStone]

"The encyclopedia that says whatever it feels like today".

I don't think that's a fair characterization.

Wikipedia works by a consensus editing process involving anyone who wishes to participate in a given article. Those who object to what's being advanced as "truth" in any article have open opportunities to improve the accuracy by participating in the process, and offering reasonable critiques of what's written. Articles can be expanded to address controversial points involving more than one perspective.

Try that at Britannica, Inc.

 

[rainbowbob]

I don't know from Wiki - I just googled "militia" and that's where I found that definition that rang true to me.

Today I took a course, "Personal Protection and the Use of Force", instructed by two very fine LEOs by the name of Ron Schmitt and Gary Shilley. Shilley recently returned to his K-9 Patrol after being shot in the face by a miscreant (who is doing 45 years). My point is, they have been there, and what they were teaching is what to do - and not do - if you are ever there. The best 6 hours and $99 I've spent since I started shooting a couple years ago.

One of the first things they told us was: "Most of the time, the police are just public stenographers by the time they arrive at your crime scene. Just the facts...We aren't obligated by law to protect you from harm - because we can't be everywhere. It is your responsibility to defend yourself and your loved ones. And then call us - we'll take it from there."

Not an exact quote - but words to that effect. It is up to us. We're it.

 

[Czar]

Would that make each of us a militia of one?

 

[rainbowbob]

Would that make each of us a militia of one?

I'll be in your militia if you'll be in mine. I think we're all in this together.

 

[brickeyee]

The militia (both organized and unorganized) is defined in Federal Law.
Look it up there.

 

[Harley Quinn]

Would that make each of us a militia of one?

I think if you read your history, it would make you cannon fodder or dead very quickly.
Why there are so many gangs in the inner citys.

"No man is an Island" comes to mind.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/257100.html

Hollywood has many thinking incorrectly, and like "I am rambo tough" NOT!

 

[hso]

OT for Activism, but interesting enough to move to GGD.

 

[romma]

I am the Militia!! That makes sense.

 

[mike101]

The PEOPLE are the MILITIA, dammit.

 

[rainbowbob]

The militia (both organized and unorganized) is defined in Federal Law.
Look it up there.

Do you a specific reference or link you could point to? "Federal Law - look it up" is pretty broad. I wouldn't know where to begin to look it up.

 

[HatFried]

I myself prefer the Dictionary.com version which states that a militia is :

1. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

2. A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.

3. The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

 

[romma]

4 Militia: State Run and funded soldiers trained and commanded by the federal government whose arms shall remain housed in a central location controlled by the federal government...

Source: ACLU


LOL

 

[jfountain2]

This is how the US government defines "Militia"

Amendment II
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 Militia Act of 1903-- 1908 amendment--
10 U.S. Code sec. 311:
Militia: composition and classes
(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."

 

[deolexrex]

From Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary.

(he was a little closer in time to the Constitution than Wikipedia)

Militia
MILI'TIA, n. [L. from miles, a soldier; Gr. war, to fight, combat, contention. The primary sense of fighting is to strive, struggle, drive, or to strike, to beat, Eng. moil, L. molior; Heb. to labor or toil.]

The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service. The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.

So, here's the question... how "well regulated" are you? You know... "companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days".

 

[Harley Quinn]

This is an interesting read and comparison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_comitatus_(common_law)

Then you have this thought:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

That should start the layperson to wonder WTH even more.

 

[rainbowbob]

Oops...duplicate

 

[Prince Yamato]

Yes. Wikipedia is "The encyclopedia that says whatever it feels like today". It's fine to quick reference general information, but if I handed in a paper citing wik as a source, my professors would ding me for it.

As opposed to Grolier or Britannica, which says whatever it feels like on a yearly-published basis.

I've actually had this debate with professors. I do use Wikipedia for certain research papers. I've cross-checked it enough with major Encyclopedias and other sources to know that it is damn accurate. I got the same old line, "you can't trust what you read on the interent" to which I replied, "you can't trust what you read in the New York Times either..." They didn't like that response, so I just replied, "whatever, you're too damn old." Needless to say, I still got my Master's degree and am now very close to completing my doctrate. So .

The firearms articles are pretty good, but could use some expanding... cough cough THR people... cough cough.

----

As far as the "well-regulated" bit... has anyone ever thought of it in the context of 18th Century English? Does "regulated" mean "controlled" like as in an AWB or does it mean "well-behaved"? As in, "well, that fellow is certainly well-regulated, isn't he". I've been mulling this over the past week. Could the framers have simply meant someone who wasn't a criminal (ie, someone who is "irregular").

So 2A could be paraphrased: "The non-criminal element of society, who are also not formal soldiers, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"?