Time to fire up the militia. What's it going to look like today?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the welcome. I agree, there is a lack of information regarding State Guard units. Some say it's one of the best kept secrets in state government. Even SDF members have trouble getting more respect and missions from their States. The feds constantly try to come up with a way to get people to volunteer. They put out things like Citizen Corps, CERT teams and such. Yet they refuse to advertise or promote State Guard service. I was prior military. Ex- Army. I watched the rise of what some call "rump militias" in the early 90s. I wanted something ...else. I found the State Guard almost by accident and enlisted only to find that very little drilling was going on. I was assigned to State Office Of Emergency Management and taught some computer tracking of equiptment and other skills which may be useful during hurricanes. Sadly, That was about all I did. The State really didn't have anything for us to do. Drills were not being held. The state didn't even put up information about the State Guard and how to volunteer on any webpage belonging to the military department as other states have done.
Since this is THR and we concentrate on firearms here let's not forget that the majority of SDFs are unarmed. As mentioned in the wikipedia article I provided, the states don't want to take on the responsibility of arming it's citizen soldiers.
The State Guard Association of the United States has been trying to get States to increase funding and/or manpower in SDFs for years with little progress.
Take a look at the SGAUS website at http://www.sgaus.org/ . I was a SGAUS member for about 7 years but recently let my membership expire since I've been inactive in the State Guard for some time.
I hope this has been informative.
 
As far as taking an oath goes, how about this one:

I, -----, do solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Officers appointed over me, so help me God."

Sounds a little familiar, I think.....
 
Mostly very thoughtful responses so far.

Regarding comments that predict that every man would for be for himself, I would hate to be that man in a pinch. A very lonely and frightening thought indeed.

In a real emergency we had better help each other, for our own good, if not for altruistic reasons. We see that truly catastrophic events reveal people's character in a hurry. We get to see the best and worst of what we are capable of as human beings. I choose to fall on the side of hope and mutual self interest.

As far as obedience is concerned, I think the principle of governing with the consent of the governed could apply here. In other words, as long as the government is constitutionally sound, we consent to obey it. And that consent can be withdrawn.

Who gets to decide if the government is lawful and constitutional? Well, I suppose that's a more slippery question. I am interested in what objective parameters folks think could be applied here.

One more thing. If a discussion about what the militia means today isn't firearms related, I don't know what is. Just because our rights don't depend on militia service for their existence, it doesn't mean that our gun rights and militia service are no longer related issues.

Scalia:
It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful
in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause.

Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small
arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and
tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the
protected right cannot change our interpretation of the
right.
 
You can't just organize your own militia. Militias are controlled and organized by some sovereign government, whether state or federal. If you get together to train and form a unit you will need to get a governor or the President to sign off on the operation.
 
You can't just organize your own militia. Militias are controlled and organized by some sovereign government, whether state or federal. If you get together to train and form a unit you will need to get a governor or the President to sign off on the operation.
Click to expand...

1st: I have NO interest in having my own militia, as you so delicately put it.

and B: Ever heard of the organized and unorganized Militias?

Tertiarily, Did you read this thread or just skip down to the bottom and post? Check out post #23, the subclasses of militias are well known and long established.
 
Powderman - that oath looks familiar. ;)

I've also often thought that a real militia that's under the direction of state or county officials could be a valuable thing to have around.
There are a lot of jobs that a volunteer force could be used for, even on a small scale.
Suppose you have a high profile court case and you want some extra security - call out a few militia members to help secure the area.
Got an escaped convict on the loose? Call your militia guys and increase your eyes and firepower.
Terrible winter storms/hurricane/heat wave/whatever? Send your militia units out to help assess the damage and get aid to anyone who needs it.
Lost girl scouts? Call some militia guys to come and help you look.
Rough neighborhood/crime wave/stuff like that? Rotate a few militia guys in on patrols from dusk til dawn to help take some strain off of your police force AND to save the municipality from having to pay OT.

Some obstacles I see that would need to be overcome:
- How are you going to convince TPTB in your state that a militia is needed? For this one, I'd find a way to save the state/municipality a bunch of money. Shouldn't be too hard because you could probably use volunteers to do a lot of the work that they are paying someone OT to do now. Still, in some areas this is going to be an uphill fight.
- How are you going to fund it? Who pays for what? Probably the easiest way to go about it would be to have minimum requirements that every member would need to meet within six months of joining. Nothing big because you're not really looking to fully equip a real army (because we already have one of those). All you'd really need is some of the basic stuff that soldiers usually have and that isn't hard for most of us to obtain on our own. And if you really need to go cheap, about the only thing you really need to standardize on would be uniforms (and maybe communications? Feel free to correct me commo guys). For that, it could be as simple as an OD green field jacket with your unit patch on it and a pair of decent boots. Low tech is the way to go here.
- Training. Not just who pays for it, but who are the warm bodies that are actually going to be doing the training? It could be accomplished with volunteers. One other idea might be to use some active duty military. Officers and NCO's could be rotated in to help train/manage militia units the way recruiters are assigned during active duty service. Maybe people who are nearing their retirement in active duty service or National Guard units could be used in this capacity. I'd think that a lot of career military people wouldn't mind the chance to keep making a little money and still be "in uniform", even if it were in such an unofficial capacity.
- Image. The word "Militia" still makes people think of a group of nuts who are holed up in a mobile home with their shotguns and a hundred pounds of beans praying for armageddon. You're going to have to call it something else and you're going to have to make its primary function something other than shooting stuff. I'd think it would make sense to use the militia largely as a supplement to local emergency forces of all kinds - basically a large pool of skilled (and armed) manpower. This also makes sense from the standpoint that the odds of needing your "militia" members to go help look for a lost cub scout is way more likely than needing to use them to go fight an invading army. Still, if need be, your guys do have guns and they do follow directions.
- Requirements. I say open it up. Probably anyone between the ages of 17 and 60 could be useful in some way. Remember, your primary function is not fighting people simply because more often that not there isn't going to be anyone to fight. Most 55 year olds can still manage to walk through the woods looking for a missing person or direct traffic around a fallen power line. Many of them also have experience in handling a crisis that people my age (mid 20's) don't. Old guys would be extremely useful to have around IMO. I'd also say that you'd need some very minimal physical qualifications. They'd need to be low enough qualifications that your average guy could easily meet them. Even if he is 20 pounds overweight, again, that still doesn't make a huge difference because in all likelyhood, your militia will never be used for any type of real military operation. If the guy can carry a five gallon can of water from the back of the truck up to the old lady's porch, he'll probably be fine for most scenarios.

Just my random thoughts on the subject.
With that, I'm going to bed.
 
maestro pistolero said:
Ever heard of the organized and unorganized Militias? Did you read this thread or just skip down to the bottom and post?
Click to expand...

IIRC, he's right.
Even unorganized militias answer to the state.
If it doesn't answer to the governor, president, or some other elected official, you no longer have a militia.
What you have in that case is a private army.
 
Actually, your statement isn't accurate. The unorganized militia is a subset of the militia, which is defined in statute as

" (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and . . . 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, first there is nothing in the law requiring ownership of a firearm or defining everyone who owns one as a member of the militia, and second, any of us over the age of 45 (even veterans like myself) are not part of the militia due to age. In a crisis I doubt we'd be sent home if we turned out , but we are not legally included.

http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/2amte...RCES.HTM#TOC34
Click to expand...

According to the U.S.C unorganized militia under title 10 you are correct. I was refering to the constitutional patriot minuetmen however, not the USC statute - all to arms.
 
There's already a local force that usually needs some help by trained forces. It's called the police and many have reserve officers who are called in to supplement the regulars at special events or during holidays. In our small city, I did it.

Several of us pooled our talents, volunteering to train regular officers in firearm use and became reserve officers as well. It gave them a great sense of pride to be able to shoot well...but it also helped them to "know their limitations", as Dirty Harry put it. Unrealistic expectations in ability can not only get a cop killed, but innocent bystanders as well. We slept better knowing the officers knew how to shoot well, when necessary...and as importantly...when not to shoot.

Personally, I'm glad I became a reserve officer. I met some great guys, learned a lot, and supplemented the family income. It's a different world today...a lot more dangerous, but if more folks got involved, maybe things would improve.

Picher
 
As our Founding Fathers that wrote the Second Amendment understood so well, the primary threat to our freedom lies with our own government.

I trust that today's militia isn't really about serving as the government's lackeys.
 
Unfortunately when I see thread titles like this, I immediately think of folks like Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, Michael Fortier, and the various paramilitary organizations which abound.
"The militia" in that context will look like a bunch of skinhead yahoos in mil-surp camo chewing Skoal. :)
 
This really depends on what you envision as the purpose.
Protecting from domestic tyranny? I doubt by the time it organizes you'd be able to do anything uniform or trained we'd be in such a world of s...

Even when it does happen, how many of us couch commandos are going to grab our rifles and start shooting when "they" come to deprive our friend Jim of his rights?

How about protecting the border?
Theres NO way that any state or government agency would ever sign off on letting armed citizens interdict illegal traffic.

How about natural/manmade disaster?
Theres NO way any .gov agency would ever consider letting armed citizens enforce any kind of law in the event of a disaster.

What are we left with?
Unarmed civil service. Even the Minutemen are mainly unarmed because they can't afford the PR/legal nightmare of a shooting confrontation.

Go ahead and throw the word "militia" out the window here.

If you want to protect against domestic tyranny, seal the borders, enforce law after Hurricane Betty, whatever, put together a squad sized element, have a mission and a plan, and don't trust anyone that you haven't known your whole life. If/when you ever decide to mobilize, trust in your heart that after you've completed your "mission" you will most likely be considered an outlaw by any .gov.

On a side note, want to know what one of my hobbies is? OPFOR for the National Guard.
When I can afford the time from work I dress up like a middle eastern bad guy and or civillian (along with other guys and gals) and help train a Guard unit that is deploying to Iraq next year.
 
I wouldn't be interested if there was LE, Nat'l. Guard or military involvment. That would be self-defeating.
 
A question for the OP: who would be commander-in-chief of this militia you propose?

Good question. The organizational structure would need to acknowledge leadership. I guess that would be the State Governor. No one else would have the built in credibility to lead.

It may well be that no Governor would want to give credibility to the Militia by utilizing it. But honestly, I think conditions would have to be pretty deteriorated before a Militia would be needed at all. It would serve a temporary purpose, to support LE and National Guard, when completely overwhelmed in the days and weeks following a natural or unnatural disaster, as in Katrina. Or if, God forbid, there were a foreign invasion.

So, instead of the government wasting precious few resources in gun confiscation efforts as we saw in New Orleans, they would embrace our contribution to stability and security and spend their time rescuing folks.

Wouldn't it be stupid, in a country of millions of law abiding gun owners, for the government to have no plan whatsoever of how to utilize us in a real SHTF situation? Why not talk about it now, before it happens again. Let's avoid chaos and confusion, and work with law enforcement to determine the scope and degree of help they may need. Where are we not needed? How can we help, but stay out of the way and not make their job more difficult. Now is the time for dialog, not after an event.

I think a lot of us are in denial that we could face devastation in this country from a foreign source. If we think we can keep anybody or anything from reaching our shores, we need only examine our track record in preventing narcotics and aliens from flowing across our borders. It's practically a parade sans brass band.

Look, we all know that an armed citizenry is a last recourse to reign in a truly tyrannical government. IMHO, we are so far from that as to make any emphasis on that fact premature and self-defeating. As long as we have arms, we've got that one covered. The purpose of a Militia is the security of a free state. That's all I'm talking about here.
 
1st: I have NO interest in having my own militia, as you so delicately put it.
and B: Ever heard of the organized and unorganized Militias?
Click to expand...

My point is simply that only a sovereign power has any authority to classify the militia or organize it so any "firing up" has to be done through legislation. If you or I personally start training and drilling a bunch of people we are organizing a rebellion, not a lawful militia. I think the key is to first and foremost de-federalize the guard units and return them to exclusive state control. There have already been extensive complaints about the fed's reliance on guard units in overseas operations. Pushing to have the units split from the federal armies by law would go a long way towards solving this problem and reviving the true organized militia.

Alternatively, a state government so inclined could create its own defense force or revive an existing defense force to act in the role left vacant by the absent NG units. I think everyone would love to have more local hands and backs available when it hits the fan. The big issue here is $$, as always.
 
I think it's important to clarify why this hypothetical militia would be called up.

The only way the U.S. Government is going to endorse a militia is either if we've been invaded and the regular forces are being pressed so hard that the militia is basically an afterthought, anyway... or if the government's control declines to the point where only local militias can be on the scene to keep order.

Neither is a pretty picture, and either way, the militia is likely to be a very ad hoc sort of deal. Whoever shows up, with whatever they can bring, wherever they can meet. If the scenario is an invasion, then we'll be starting out as guerillas, and hopefully survive long enough to become real partisans. Those who aren't behind enemy lines are more likely to be enrolled in the army or nat'l guard, as needed, and trained if possible. Could be, if things are desperate enough, that they'll just take down your name, and put you on the line with a regular who's expected to show you the ropes.

If it's a breakdown of government control we're looking at, then things are bit different. A home-grown garrison, not a partisan movement. That probably means deputization under local LE, with part-time duties and an assumed "on call" role.

Hate to say it, but unless the government is fighting for its life, it's going to regard "militias" not under their direct control as threats, not allies. Any sort of "militia" being raised is going to be headed by a government official (albeit probably a local one) if it wants government approval.
 
FourNine, I agree with your post completely. Reluctantly, even the part about being regarded as threats by the government. Perhaps all we can really do is just be as ready as possible, and keep our powder dry.

If I were in LE leadership, especially in a small community with limited resources, I would take a little comfort from having roster of upstanding folks in the community, volunteers who were screened and who trained with LE maybe once or twice a year, just for contingency. Make it a community event, then have a BBQ and all go home. Probably never get called, if fact let's hope not.

If you or I personally start training and drilling a bunch of people we are organizing a rebellion, not a lawful militia.
Click to expand...

HOW? Isn't rebellion a matter of intent? A group could train all year long for readiness to support our community, and lacking any intent to rebel against anything, it is merely training. Training for an event which may never occur, granted, but nothing more than training.
 
In thinking about this, the right is enumerated in the 2nd Amendment. I'm not sure we need permission to form militias; I think that it's been changed through a mere law.

Any lawyers care to comment?

***

As for showing up: why not? We didn't have police forces for a LONG time. Perhaps it's time to start sending militias to the border...the feds won't do it and that experiment with The Minutemen reduced activity in that sector by almost 100%.

Additionally, why not make use of the militia through the sheriff? They have volunteer police training in many counties. If cops are overwhelmed, then bring the militia in to cover certain areas with strict operating orders under a police sargeant or experienced deputy. They don't even really have to be armed; some counties around here have armed volunteers (basically, unpaid FULL police officer positions) and others are just unarmed traffic controllers.

Establish the requirement that participants provide their own gear and have ammo in certain flavors: 223, 5.56x45, 762x39, or 308 Win for rifle. Since it's totally voluntary, those willing and able to pay for it will do so. Everyone else will skip participating.

The gear requirements will also act as a first line screen. Not everyone is willing to shell out $1500-2000 for guns and add another $1k for other stuff.

I really don't see a problem with such a system. The militia wouldn't be going to war; they'd be responsible for the homefront.
 
A group could train all year long for readiness to support our community, and lacking any intent to rebel against anything, it is merely training. Training for an event which may never occur, granted, but nothing more than training.
Click to expand...

That begs the question, what's the even you'd be training for? Just foreign invasion or attacking the government itself?

In thinking about this, the right is enumerated in the 2nd Amendment. I'm not sure we need permission to form militias; I think that it's been changed through a mere law.
Click to expand...

Heller put the final nail in that idea. The Second creates an individual right to keep and bear arms, not a GROUP right to form militias. The miltia prong is all but dead letter now.

It think having layers of organized militia responsible for real homeland security and border enforcement is a great idea, but it's got to be done through legislation.
 
Cosmoline said:
You can't just organize your own militia. Militias are controlled and organized by some sovereign government, whether state or federal. If you get together to train and form a unit you will need to get a governor or the President to sign off on the operation.
Click to expand...
Cosmoline said:
My point is simply that only a sovereign power has any authority to classify the militia or organize it so any "firing up" has to be done through legislation. If you or I personally start training and drilling a bunch of people we are organizing a rebellion, not a lawful militia.
Click to expand...
I'm not certain you are entirely correct. First, "the Militia" already exists, under Federal law. It is us (except that I'm too old, under the law). I assume the laws of each state are different, but in my state it is NOT unlawful for citizens to engage in paramilitary training unless such training is for the purpose of civil unrest (or some term similar to that). So, in other words, if a bunch of us want to play soldier on the weekend with the idea that we are preparing ourselves to defend the State or the country in time of emergency -- that's legal.

And I don't believe the law even in Colonial times made the existence of the militia dependent on the government organizing it and arming it. The Militia Act of 1792 clearly called for each man to provide his own firearms and a basic ration of ammunition. Why should it be different today? This is where I have some reservations about the state guard type units. Precisely because they are organized under the military department of their respective states, and in those states with which I am familiar they seem to be attached to the National Guard in a sort of "junior varsity" relationship -- I don't think they really qualify as citizen militias.

In a nutshell, it's one thing for the militia to exist and to say that the Governor may call on it/them in time of emergency. It's a different animal to say that the militia can exist only if the State decides to organize, train, and equip it. That's not a "militia." That's a standing army. Any equipment the government (state or Federal) issues can be UNissued tomorrow. The 2nd Amendment wasn't written around the idea that we would use government-issued weapons to defend the Constitution.
 
A militia that is needed in times of dire crisis must adopt the organization strategies of the 8th Route Army. The 8th Route Army is one of the most influential militias in the world, having fought both the Japanese and the Guomingdang, and finally consolidated into what will become the People's Liberation Army.

Such strategies call for "People first" ideology. That is, ensuring equal benefits for everyone in the area the militia is covering. That means settling local disputes and public works as well. That way, the enemy will experience a much harder time trying to re-infiltrate liberated areas, especially since the local citizenry is also mobilized and united.

Such a militia not only require good military leaders, but political leaders as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
A modern militia
Replies
13
Views
867
nygunguy
N
D
  • Locked
A good article by a young freedom person.
Replies
4
Views
1K
Blackhawk
B
A
  • Locked
What is the Militia?
Replies
0
Views
286
Attala_County
A
2
  • Locked
The Militia Threat Is Real
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
ravinraven
R
W
  • Locked
19 April 1775 vs. The D.C. Gun Case
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
yokel
yokel
Back
Top