• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

That "militia thing"

tomrkba

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
125
Location
Virginia
What would happen if 100 or more men showed up at the local town square, formed up, said the pledge of allegiance, saluted the flag, and someone did an inspection? Every man would have a full kit, rifle, sidearm and ammunition. There would be no standard uniform or "unit". They'd then disperse and go home. No running around the woods, no diatribes against tyranny, the UN, or anything else. It would not be associated with any sort of protest. It would be a simple activity in an open carry state.

I have been thinking about the intent behind the Second Amendment (and state right to keep and bear arms) with all the swirl around gun control. I have noticed that nobody is bringing up the "militia" part of the right. I believe the Founders intended it to be a responsibility of every man to participate in at some level. Yet, today, nobody does it in any formal manner. It seems to me that very few regular shooters are prepared in any sort of way beyond what would be required for the next action shooting match.

I think this is a fundamental portion of the right to keep and bear arms. It seems to me that we should begin to engage in this activity independent of politics or protests.

This is just a thought, nothing more. I'm curious if others have been thinking about this too.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Militia is a reference to Organized, State-sanctioned Militia; not Cletus and his band of degenerates getting together to prepare for and/or fight a perceived tyrannical Government.

You can act like you're forming or militia, and/or actually form a militia, that's not an exercise of your Second Amendment Right, that's just an exercise.

I was discussing this with an acquaintance today, and they were telling me that they're going to rise-up with millions of other patriotic Americans and fight the Government, mind you, he looked like he can't seem to fight his way away from a box of twinkies. My point is, the Government has professionally trained troops...the average American who is looking to form a militia, better get physically ready, inn the event they may have to cash the check their mouth wrote. My prediction will be: Most of the 80 million firearm owners will sit down, and shut the heck up if (it won't happen) the Government came knocking on their door to confiscate their firearms.

Or they will go out like a non-patriotic punk, like, for instance: Jimmy Lee Dykes. He comes out from his homemade bunker, shoots a school bus driver, takes a kid hostage, all because he thinks the Government is coming after him. It makes me wonder what would have happen if he was able to get together a militia. Perhaps they would have taken the whole school bus full of kids.
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Cletus LOL

But really, Mao started out will a few peasant, uneducated farmers and took over his country that had an excellent army and police forces.

It can be done ... and I think it can be done against the US military more easily than Mao's adversary.

Its one of the anti's arguments ... well, you can't win ... its simply not true.

There are only about 2 million soldiers ... all uniformed , easy to spot, easy to kill.

You can probably walk right up to most of them if you had a mind to.

And the pizza delivery guy? Like a nuke ! All bases wave him right in ...
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
Beretta92FSLady said:
Militia is a reference to Organized, State-sanctioned Militia; not Cletus and his band of degenerates getting together to prepare for and/or fight a perceived tyrannical Government.


10 USC § 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.
 
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Cletus LOL

But really, Mao started out will a few peasant, uneducated farmers and took over his country that had an excellent army and police forces.

It can be done ... and I think it can be done against the US military more easily than Mao's adversary.

Its one of the anti's arguments ... well, you can't win ... its simply not true.

There are only about 2 million soldiers ... all uniformed , easy to spot, easy to kill.

You can probably walk right up to most of them if you had a mind to.

And the pizza delivery guy? Like a nuke ! All bases wave him right in ...

Your example of a militia forming from grass roots isn't going to be a boon for support of militia sprouting-up in this way.

You forget, there are about 2 million soldiers with the backing of the absolute Power, and resources of the Federal Government.

I admit that if our Federal Government were wanting to crush Americans, they could, and there would be no Country to stop them...unlike when other Countries do it, or attempt it, but are quailed by the backing of the US...no one will come to our aid, NO ONE! I can't blame them, not after ten years in Afghanistan and Iraq, raising hell in places we don't belong.
 
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee


10 USC § 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.



Not you again...I thought I got rid of you!

I agree, they would be considered a militia, but not a Militia.--I'm sure you understand the distinction I just made.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
I can only speak for myself and hundreds of other people I have served with when I say that were our forces to be mobilized against our own citizens those at the top would find themselves with a sudden decrease in available manpower.

People who talk about our country and its servicemembers like we'd all be willing accomplices are outside of their heads completely.

A few thousand Fedayeen/Republican Guard/Taliban/Al Qaeda throw major wrenches in the works of the worlds most well organized, all volunteer fighting forces, you could not even imagine a scenario of countrymen on countrymen at a ratio of at least 4:1 in the militias favor. Even with drone support, thermal/night optics, night-strike capability etc, you cannot win that fight. Period.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
Not you again...I thought I got rid of you!

I agree, they would be considered a militia, but not a Militia.--I'm sure you understand the distinction I just made.

The magical inference, to save face, that the capitalization of a word in this case changes the definition.

Still backpedaling with the worst of them eh?
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
I can only speak for myself and hundreds of other people I have served with when I say that were our forces to be mobilized against our own citizens those at the top would find themselves with a sudden decrease in available manpower.

People who talk about our country and its servicemembers like we'd all be willing accomplices are outside of their heads completely.

A few thousand Fedayeen/Republican Guard/Taliban/Al Qaeda throw major wrenches in the works of the worlds most well organized, all volunteer fighting forces, you could not even imagine a scenario of countrymen on countrymen at a ratio of at least 4:1 in the militias favor. Even with drone support, thermal/night optics, night-strike capability etc, you cannot win that fight. Period.

Nothing a bit of propaganda won't fix. Goebbels proved that. Yes, there will be some service members who won't play ball, but most will.

They throw a wrench in it because we follow certain rules. But as I stated: If the Federal Government took to its own citizens, who would assure the hand wasn't so heavy?
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
The magical inference, to save face, that the capitalization of a word in this case changes the definition.

Still backpedaling with the worst of them eh?

No backpedaling, merely pointing out a detail you obviously missed. Your crude attempt at deviating from your flawed presumption.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
I have read the Federalist papers.

Cite. Now.

Or forever hold your peace.

If you have Reade the Federalist, then there is nothing for us to discuss. Don't blame me if you missed that particular detail.

People, when you read the Federalist, Read it, don't merely read it.
 
Last edited:

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
If you have Reade the Federalist, then there is nothing for us to discuss. Don't blame me if you missed that particular detail.

People, when you read the Federalist, Read it, don't merely read it.


(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

Rules of the forum.


​Cite to your authority or be reported for violation of the rules.

Do it now or hold your peace.

Also, which Federalist paper specifically covers the militia?

Hint: Its Hamiltons #29, "Concerning the Militia"
 
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

Rules of the forum.


​Cite to your authority or be reported for violation of the rules.

Do it now or hold your peace.

*looks around* Ok, I will throw you just one more bone, and that's it!: Posse Comitatus.

It's in the Federalist. I promise, you will find it, if you Read the Federalist.

There is one paper that specifically covers Militia. And there are others that reference Militia. There is a distinction made, by inference, and it has to do with Militia and Posse Comitatus.

Now, I don't want anyone to misunderstand me, there are many militia that can be formed, but there is only one Militia.
 
Last edited:

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
This is sad.

Beretta. You aren't qualified to comment from an educated standpoint on the federalist papers, and nothing within the appropriate one (Hamiltons #29, "Concerning the Militia" by the way...) makes any distinction between capitalized and uncapitalized variations of the word.

By the way, for the amusement of those involved, simply highlight the large open space at the bottom of my last post for some lulz.

Beretta didn't even know which paper it was and is still, likely, googling it at this moment.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
*looks around* Ok, I will throw you just one more bone, and that's it!: Posse Comitatus.

It's in the Federalist. I promise, you will find it, if you Read the Federalist.

There is one paper that specifically covers Militia. And there are others that reference Militia. There is a distinction made, by inference, and it has to do with Militia and Posse Comitatus.

Now, I don't want anyone to misunderstand me, there are many militia that can be formed, but there is only one Militia.


Obey forum rules or be reported for non-compliance:

Where is your citation as mandated by forum rules? Cite now, or forever hold your peace.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
This is sad.

Beretta. You aren't qualified to comment from an educated standpoint on the federalist papers, and nothing within the appropriate one (Hamiltons #29, "Concerning the Militia" by the way...) makes any distinction between capitalized and uncapitalized variations of the word.

By the way, for the amusement of those involved, simply highlight the large open space at the bottom of my last post for some lulz.

Beretta didn't even know which paper it was and is still, likely, googling it at this moment.

I'm not making my references to the Federalist under the guise of a qualified, or educated standpoint; I did not claim to.

Your question was regarding inference, not actual. read your previous posts. Please, pay attention to what you write.

People, don't Google for information on the Federalist, get a copy of it, and read it in it entirety.
 
Last edited:

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Obey forum rules or be reported for non-compliance:

Where is your citation as mandated by forum rules? Cite now, or forever hold your peace.

Let's look it over, and see if I'm breaking any rule:

(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

Rules of the forum.

I'm breaking ZERO rules. I did not state a rule of law. I simply references the Federalist, and what it infers.

Report me. If a moderator thinks that I stated a rule of law, they can tell me to comply, and I will.
 
Last edited:
Top