Re: Western liberal militia?

27
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:54 pm
wings wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:50 pm The National Guard is "the" militia. It should, by rights, be non-partisan, geared towards community defense, responsive to local elected officials, and following all applicable laws and codes of conduct. If you're looking to serve, they recruit.

They do good work. Disaster response in particular.

Laws regarding defensive use of firearms vary from state to state, but they tend to focus on response to immediate threats to human life, not existential threats to the Constitution. The club certainly doesn't advocate illegal activity or violence, and we're all a little prickly about potential trolls and provocateurs. Can't imagine why.
The "militia" refers to the people in a specified age bracket and at the time of the framing. male. It has nothing to do with the National Guard.
The militia is referenced 6 times in the Constitution, and only one of those is in 2A.
It's referenced 3 times in Art I, once in Art II, and once in 5A. In all of them it is a military organization, organized, defined and established by Congress, allowing the officers to be selected by the states. 2A is NOT the be-all and end-all definition of the militia, and, in those definitions, it very closely parallels the National Guard in just about all things.

For example from Article I, under the Powers of Congress (2 of the 6 references):
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
I dunno. Sounds exactly like the National Guard to me.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Western liberal militia?

28
YankeeTarheel wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:19 pm
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:54 pm
wings wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:50 pm The National Guard is "the" militia. It should, by rights, be non-partisan, geared towards community defense, responsive to local elected officials, and following all applicable laws and codes of conduct. If you're looking to serve, they recruit.

They do good work. Disaster response in particular.

Laws regarding defensive use of firearms vary from state to state, but they tend to focus on response to immediate threats to human life, not existential threats to the Constitution. The club certainly doesn't advocate illegal activity or violence, and we're all a little prickly about potential trolls and provocateurs. Can't imagine why.
The "militia" refers to the people in a specified age bracket and at the time of the framing. male. It has nothing to do with the National Guard.
The militia is referenced 6 times in the Constitution, and only one of those is in 2A.
It's referenced 3 times in Art I, once in Art II, and once in 5A. In all of them it is a military organization, organized, defined and established by Congress, allowing the officers to be selected by the states. 2A is NOT the be-all and end-all definition of the militia, and, in those definitions, it very closely parallels the National Guard in just about all things.

For example from Article I, under the Powers of Congress (2 of the 6 references):
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
I dunno. Sounds exactly like the National Guard to me.
I'm pretty sure that is not correct. Then again, this has been chewed and beat to death in this forum. I'm sure there are others here that could correct you, I don't care to.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Western liberal militia?

29
wings wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:15 pm The National Guard is the latest incarnation of the 'militia' formalized originally in the Militia Acts. Look it up.
The Bill of Rights was ratified before the Militia Act. They are two different constructs, look it up.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Western liberal militia?

30
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:35 pm
wings wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:15 pm The National Guard is the latest incarnation of the 'militia' formalized originally in the Militia Acts. Look it up.
The Bill of Rights was ratified before the Militia Act. They are two different constructs, look it up.
And the main body of the Constitution was ratified before the Bill of Rights and spells out what the Militia is:

"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia"---look it up. Article I Section 8, paragraphs 14 and 15.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Western liberal militia?

31
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:29 pm
YankeeTarheel wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 6:19 pm
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:54 pm
wings wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:50 pm The National Guard is "the" militia. It should, by rights, be non-partisan, geared towards community defense, responsive to local elected officials, and following all applicable laws and codes of conduct. If you're looking to serve, they recruit.

They do good work. Disaster response in particular.

Laws regarding defensive use of firearms vary from state to state, but they tend to focus on response to immediate threats to human life, not existential threats to the Constitution. The club certainly doesn't advocate illegal activity or violence, and we're all a little prickly about potential trolls and provocateurs. Can't imagine why.
The "militia" refers to the people in a specified age bracket and at the time of the framing. male. It has nothing to do with the National Guard.
The militia is referenced 6 times in the Constitution, and only one of those is in 2A.
It's referenced 3 times in Art I, once in Art II, and once in 5A. In all of them it is a military organization, organized, defined and established by Congress, allowing the officers to be selected by the states. 2A is NOT the be-all and end-all definition of the militia, and, in those definitions, it very closely parallels the National Guard in just about all things.

For example from Article I, under the Powers of Congress (2 of the 6 references):
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
I dunno. Sounds exactly like the National Guard to me.
I'm pretty sure that is not correct. Then again, this has been chewed and beat to death in this forum. I'm sure there are others here that could correct you, I don't care to.
Right. I'm citing Art I, Sect 8, Paragraph 15 verbatim! What's not right?
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Western liberal militia?

34
CDFingers wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:22 pm More than 99% of the ammunition used per year in America is used for recreation. The rest of it is in lurker's basement.

CDFingers
don't have a basement.
i have about 400 rds each of 45acp, 7.62N, 5.56 and 30-06, and about 100 each of .25acp , .380, .30 mauser and 30-40 krag. i keep them all* under the bench in the shed. there's a .50cal can full of 7.62x54r, but technically it's not mine.

* i keep a mag or two of 7.62 nato and 45acp inside, near the relevant guns. in case of zombies.
i'm retired. what's your excuse?

Re: Western liberal militia?

35
lurker wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:26 pm
CDFingers wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:22 pm More than 99% of the ammunition used per year in America is used for recreation. The rest of it is in lurker's basement.

CDFingers
don't have a basement.
i have about 400 rds each of 45acp, 7.62N, 5.56 and 30-06, and about 100 each of .25acp , .380, .30 mauser and 30-40 krag. i keep them all* under the bench in the shed. there's a .50cal can full of 7.62x54r, but technically it's not mine.

* i keep a mag or two of 7.62 nato and 45acp inside, near the relevant guns. in case of zombies.
No basement, eh? Just like Pizzagate1!!! 8-)
CDFingers wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:18 pm I never think about shooting someone.
Now, that's not exactly true. Was the Friday after 9/11 and school had just started back up. A few of us went to a bar. Shortly thereafter there was a county-wide power out completely unrelated to any terrorism. As I was driving through the streets that had become parking lots with everyone going home, I had an Art Bell thought and considered how excellent it would be for terrorists to target power stations, plunge whole regions into darkness, then ride down from the hills to set free all our pigs. The Friday after the Tuesday. So I went home, took out a rifle, and clicked a mag in. Leaned it next to my bed. For that night, but i did it. So, not "never."

CDFingers
Crazy cat peekin' through a lace bandana
like a one-eyed Cheshire, like a diamond-eyed Jack

Re: Western liberal militia?

38
CDFingers wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:29 pm
lurker wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:26 pm
CDFingers wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 7:22 pm More than 99% of the ammunition used per year in America is used for recreation. The rest of it is in lurker's basement.

CDFingers
don't have a basement.
i have about 400 rds each of 45acp, 7.62N, 5.56 and 30-06, and about 100 each of .25acp , .380, .30 mauser and 30-40 krag. i keep them all* under the bench in the shed. there's a .50cal can full of 7.62x54r, but technically it's not mine.

* i keep a mag or two of 7.62 nato and 45acp inside, near the relevant guns. in case of zombies.
No basement, eh? Just like Pizzagate1!!! 8-)
CDFingers wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:18 pm I never think about shooting someone.
Now, that's not exactly true. Was the Friday after 9/11 and school had just started back up. A few of us went to a bar. Shortly thereafter there was a county-wide power out completely unrelated to any terrorism. As I was driving through the streets that had become parking lots with everyone going home, I had an Art Bell thought and considered how excellent it would be for terrorists to target power stations, plunge whole regions into darkness, then ride down from the hills to set free all our pigs. The Friday after the Tuesday. So I went home, took out a rifle, and clicked a mag in. Leaned it next to my bed. For that night, but i did it. So, not "never."

CDFingers
I've not only thought about it, I practice "it" regularly. And after every drill session I want to throw up. Because the thought of shooting a living thing is repugnant to me. Even a living thing which I believe has no right to share our oxygen.

Following a death threat, from the person convicted of attempting to stick a knife into me, conveyed by prison personnel prior to his pending release, I purchased a .40 caliber SIG P226. Then I purchased training sessions in defensive handgun. I'll sleep with whatever current iteration I have within arms reach until I am confident this racist pig is worm food. Or back where he belongs.

And I fervently hope I'm never put into a position of using any of the purchases made that day or the training that I continue to keep up with.

Not wanting to isn't the same as not being capable of doing so.

The difference between being cognizant of a danger, versus seeking an opportunity. Pretty clear distinction I think.
Subliterate Buffooery of the right...
Literate Ignorance of the left...
We Are So Screwed

Re: Western liberal militia?

40
You lost me with the pigs, CD. Why would terrorists go through all that trouble to blow up a power station just so they can go to your pig farm and wreak some havoc?

Or does “pig” have an alternate meaning?

Like “pizza”...
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Western liberal militia?

41
sikacz wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:54 pm
wings wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:50 pm The National Guard is "the" militia. It should, by rights, be non-partisan, geared towards community defense, responsive to local elected officials, and following all applicable laws and codes of conduct. If you're looking to serve, they recruit.

They do good work. Disaster response in particular.

Laws regarding defensive use of firearms vary from state to state, but they tend to focus on response to immediate threats to human life, not existential threats to the Constitution. The club certainly doesn't advocate illegal activity or violence, and we're all a little prickly about potential trolls and provocateurs. Can't imagine why.
The "militia" refers to the people in a specified age bracket and at the time of the framing. male. It has nothing to do with the National Guard.
This is not the 1700s.
To be vintage it must be older than me!
The next gun I buy will be the next to last gun I ever buy. PROMISE!
jim

Re: Western liberal militia?

42
Bisbee wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 2:51 am You lost me with the pigs, CD. Why would terrorists go through all that trouble to blow up a power station just so they can go to your pig farm and wreak some havoc?

Or does “pig” have an alternate meaning?

Like “pizza”...
I had to make the example as unusual as the reason for thinking it--know there're lots of bacon fans here, like geno. In a way it was a foolish thing to write amid a discussion about needing to shoot someone. See, rolandson has a totally solid and legit reason for preparing for self defense. Except for my cats, no one has ever tried to stab me or anything beyond reminding me how I don't look like Rock Hudson or Bill Cosby--which is pretty tame by comparison. So, it was very unusual for me to click in a magazine, even though my trusty bayonet is always right there, the bayo from my childhood that I learned to stick in a tree from ten feet and used to poke zillions of holes in a very forgiving banana tree.

CDFingers
Crazy cat peekin' through a lace bandana
like a one-eyed Cheshire, like a diamond-eyed Jack

Re: Western liberal militia?

43
The US National Guard cites as their birth date December 13,1636 when militia units were formed in Massachusetts. Ironically 1636 is the same year Harvard University was founded, the oldest university (college) in the US. When militias were founded colonists were still fighting Indians, the French, the Spanish and later the British, the militias pre-date the US and the US military. No US at that time with secure borders. Few people lived in cities, most lived in towns and rural areas and strength was in numbers in defending their families and property.
The Militia Act of May 8, 1792, permitted militia units organized before the May 8, 1792, to retain their "customary privileges." This provision of the militia act was perpetuated by the Militia Act of 1903, the National Defense Act of 1916, and by subsequent law.
Can't have states with their own armies, have to bring them under federal control. The feds paid for equiping them so they could dictate to states.

Some cities and some towns had night watch and constables, but it wasn't until 1838 that the first US police force was organized based on London's peelers/bobbies. Some say that's when things started going downhill as police became the tools for politicians and the wealthy.

https://www.nationalguard.mil/About-the ... egiments.]

https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/hi ... tes-part-2
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Western liberal militia?

44
The current National Guard system was enshrined under the - wait for it - Militia Act of 1903, which replaced those of 1792, 1795, and 1808. It set up organized state militias that could be brought under federal control in a crisis - distinct from the 'disorganized' one consisting of men of age to serve.

The Bill of Rights didn't protect individual rights, it limited the Federal government's ability to infringe upon the states. The states were free to limit free speech, religion, the bearing of arms, etc. according to their own laws and constitutions up until 1868 and the ratification of the 14th Amendment, hallowed be its name.

The Bill of Rights was not written in an age that even envisioned the possibility that slavery would be rendered unconstitutional, that the same rights would apply to men - or eventually women - regardless of their race, or that the Federal government would have to enshrine individual rights against states dedicated to the tyrannical proposition of chattel slavery. We're still working through the ramifications of the 14th, as seen in Heller vs. DC.

Don't romanticize the Founders. They weren't thinking about you. They were thinking about slaveholders.

Re: Western liberal militia?

45
rolandson wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:57 pm Why do we seem to have this fascination with shooting each other? What the fuck is wrong with us?
Great point. Maybe I did come on too strong. Let me be clear. I fear people shooting each other. I have zero fascination with people shooting each other. I also fear that there is a lot of willingness by extreme conservatives to trample on the Constitution and the electoral process if allowed to. In fact, many of my conservative friends have told me that anything would be okay even abolishing the election or overruling the election results for Trump to have a second term. I think liberals, not radicals, but liberals. Actually forget liberals. Anyone who actually wants to see a democracy function should be organized in terms of communication, civil organization, legal protest and defense preparedeness. I came her seeking the fourth, but because I came on too strong, all I have gotten is a bunch of puking and dismissal. Oh well.

Re: Western liberal militia?

49
ElectricSailboats wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 6:44 pm
rolandson wrote: Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:57 pm Why do we seem to have this fascination with shooting each other? What the fuck is wrong with us?
Great point. Maybe I did come on too strong. Let me be clear. I fear people shooting each other. I have zero fascination with people shooting each other. I also fear that there is a lot of willingness by extreme conservatives to trample on the Constitution and the electoral process if allowed to. In fact, many of my conservative friends have told me that anything would be okay even abolishing the election or overruling the election results for Trump to have a second term. I think liberals, not radicals, but liberals. Actually forget liberals. Anyone who actually wants to see a democracy function should be organized in terms of communication, civil organization, legal protest and defense preparedeness. I came her seeking the fourth, but because I came on too strong, all I have gotten is a bunch of puking and dismissal. Oh well.
Don't get us wrong. We're mostly liberals, ranging the gamut. We all shoot, for all sorts of reasons. But the aims and purpose of the club are printed on the tin - we're not a militia. We don't advocate any sort of illegal or even paramilitary activity. We shoot, we educate, we advocate. We provide a place for liberal gun owners to kibbitz without much interference from right-wing trolls of the sort you describe.

I would like to think that every one of us would stand up to defend our friends, our families, our neighbors and communities if it came down to brass tacks. That's what 'disorganized' militia is. But as a matter of law, the National Guard is 'the' militia. One of my best friends serves. Among other things, they are not allowed to obey illegal orders, under military code. Polling shows that Trump is underwater for support even among the military, especially among officers. I don't worry about them. They're the ones I'm counting on doing the right thing.

It's the terror groups that call themselves militias that we worry about. There's also the provocateurs to consider - people who might join a previously peaceful group and try to suss out support for violence, or even instigate it. There's decades of track record for that kind of behavior from undercover police and FBI. A bunch of us are old enough to remember J. Edgar.

Re: Western liberal militia?

50
Liberal and militia, as the term us usually used today, just don't go together. If there ever becomes a time to break out the torches, sharpen the pitchforks and throw the tea into the bay, we will do what is needed. Right now what we need are votes.

If you pay attention to the "right-wing militias" philosophy, you will find that it is so flawed as to be laughable to consider them any more a "danger" to our society than the Klan has been my entire lifetime. Yea, they are out there, and they can cause localized problems, but they are stupid and live in a Rambo fantasy. There is not as many out there as they seem to think. If they ever decide to really break bad, they will be squashed like the bugs that they are. The most dangerous right-wingers are not in the "militias", but silently hidden in the police departments.

We do not have a problem with armed right-wing groups as long as the senior military leadership in this country continues to support and defend the Constitution. Recently, they have seemed to indicate that that is exactly where they are. Try to visualize a bunch of over 40 fat men with ARs going up against a drone armed with the Hellfire missiles.....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests