I heard the “well regulated militia argument” from a liberal Friday night. This could be the end of the second amendment folks, as the left has their we’ll rehearsed talking points and the community organizer in chief has made sure they understand it and are spreading the word through their well oiled network. An extension of election tactics.
A combination of a state and the federal government, determines what are military grade weapons *in their relationship dedicated to our mutual defense,* and given that, both need for the able-bodied militia of that state, to be well trained to Arms. “Arms” (capital A) being those military grade weapons and implying being “well regulated.”
Once agreed upon, the states, indeed the counties *can* order a muster of the militia “with complete Arms” for inspection and training.
A whole lot of people who own semi-automatic rifles will be surprised to discover that the order to muster *applies to them,* and they *must* comply with “being called.”
The states *do* have the power to require the able-bodied to fulfill their militia duties; the militia of each state, is *not* an “all volunteer organization.” Yet, for the most part, orders to muster have been met over the years, sufficiently to complete a complement of men at Arms. (Though some times, officers have been empowered by their state legislature to take the necessary steps to complete their ranks.)
A lot of people don’t know this, because the old militia laws have languished. That has become something of a shame, because we need now to have these demonstrations, in order to show what are good weapons practices, in addition to making clear to the care-less liberal media, *who really are the militia.*
Largely this matter became an issue because some “religiously devoted” (18th and 19th centuries, when the country was young) did not want to be compelled to Arms” in conflict with their religious beliefs, merely because they were able-bodied and keeping and bearing a military grade weapon.
In fact, during the work that developed the wording of the 2nd Amendment, there was for a brief time, a clause about a religous exemption.
Guess what? And, this is important. The clause was removed from the wording, because it was feared that some tyrannical government force might order people to be disarmed because of their religous devotion - example: You claim that you are an objector on religious grounds, OK, but hand in your military grade weapons!
Well, the Founding Fathers did not want that to happen, so the wording was scrapped.
Yet here is what a lot of Americans do not know:
Even though the wording was scrapped, the history of its surfacing, is the basis of our laws about your having the right to object to military service because of your religious conviction!
Another possible clause spelled out “for the purpose of killing game”(submitted by Pennsylvania), but it too was removed, because the Founding Fathers did not want individuals to be restricted to only being allowed to keep and bear Arms in compliance with gaming laws. That practice, of abusing game laws in order to control Arms among the populace, was not to be, in these United States.
THERE WOULD BE NO NARROW DEFINITION OF, NOR ENUMERATION OF, WHY THERE IS AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT!
We simply have the right to keep and bear Arms, military grade and personal, affirmed by the 2nd Amendment, but if you bear the military grade, you must comply with militia laws.
It’s up to the people of a state, to make sure they have the militia laws in tune with their needs. Some may be restrictive at a personal level, while other states may not be so. Traveling thru a more restrictive state with your weapons, you may find that you have to store them within that state’ system of armories until you depart that state.
*That* is what New York should do, instead of throwing law-abiding American citizens in jail.
OK, back to the drill ...
Semi-automatic rifles *are* actually military grade *if* capable of using “standard issue” military ammunition. Same as the M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle used during WW-II and long after.
Almost always, the criteria are, that the weapon(s) be common, and the ammunition be common, enough, that they (weapon and ammo) fit into the state or national need.
Bolt action .30-06 rifles *are* military grade. Semi-automatic rifles that use ammunition that the U.S. military uses, *are* military grade (though the current definition of “assault weapon” may not apply to either).
As a resident in any state of these United States of American, if you own a military grade rifle and are able-bodied (though, with some exceptions that your state legislature may apply) you *can be ordered to comply with an order to muster* because you keep and bear such an Arm (unless you object to military service on the grounds of your religious conviction).
It is very revealing, going thru the old militia laws of England, France, the Dutch and German/Roman principalities, and of old Spain, and then the militia laws of the colonies and the young uniting states, then the early United States ... to find the consolidation of militia practices thence standard principles.
Military grade weapons ownership, keeping, and bearing, *do include* a duty to participate in the militia and meanwhile maintain a practice of Arms that responds to lawful authority at all times.
The people of any state, thru their legislators in assembly, do have the right to know what is the military strength and where is it, across their state, of the able-bodied who may be ordered to the muster.
The left is now very close “at university” to demanding that the militia law be *strictly* enforced.
I know of one professor “at university” in my state, who has been researching this for years. He’s a left-wing-nut angling for *strict enforcement.* Meaning, that you will be ordered to answer the call to muster and register your military grade rifle.
As vague as this may seem on anybody’s radar now, I expect this path, because it is the nature of the left to seek avenues thru the courts -— they will try to get a judge to request a governor or even a county sheriff to order the muster.
I personally think that we should beat the left to the punch, so we can wisely perform our duties instead of being dictated to by left-wing-nuts’ inventions.
About the history of all this
I stumbled onto one of the books about the development of the militia, 30 years ago. I was floored, because I had thought until then, what lot of people think simply from the wording of the 2nd Amendment.
I was on quest. It was not easy to find information while avoiding the N.R.A. I wanted to be able to honestly say that I found this without that organization’s help - because I expected to often be confronted by: “Oh, you’re an N.R.A. member.” (I’d like to be.) But I want to be able to say “No.” and thus disarm our opponents.
I’m posting this here as my own opinion, leaving the research to the reader. I spent a lot of time and money to find out about our 2nd Amendment. I wanted originally to find what was in law schools about the 2nd Amendment. I had imagined that there would be major sections; but I did not get far, as the law books I did find in stores, were practically devoid of any mention of the 2nd Amendment, except where the liberal law school would try to bash the 2nd Amendment into the being the left’s narrow-minded anti-individual-rights contrivance.
I had better luck spending time in university libraries in the old history collections, than in any legal section.
*After* I had hunted around, then I went to the N.R.A. and was happy to find, that it actually has a lot of good information about the historical record.
One thing I found, was that the states have a lot of power to say, what happens to military grade weapons. For example, under an emergency, a state can order you to ship your military grade weapons to the nearest armory, to satisfy the state’s need to be better organized (logistics).
On the other hand, the federal government never needed to step into the business of gun control laws; all along, the states - Illinois - could have strictly enforced the keeping and bearing Arms.
The overall problem was, back then, during the early years of machine guns and organized crime *together,* the federal government was already a trough to which states were lined up for handouts, thus handing power to the federal government “to solve local problems.”
The federal government does have a lot of clout in regard to military grade weapons, but the federal government must still be in agreement with a state, for the final decision on what the weapons will be so ... and *that* became easier on the federal government, as a state would be expecting federal largesse (and state representatives were too afraid to confront organized crime *or were part of it*).
The National Rifle Association, would surprise many, by the books that it has on its shelves, which go into great detail about the granular development of the militia of Europe, then the militia of North American colonies, then uniting states, then the early United States. A period of a few hundred years over which militia law and principles grew along with our natural rights, both for the purpose of our gaining our freedom from serfdom, and then maintaining it.
If you’re interested in old research, here is an example of what to look for:
Military Obligation: The American Tradition. A Compilation of the Enactments of Compulsion From the Earliest Settlements of the Original Thirteen Colonies in 1607 Through the Articles of Confederation, 1789. Compiled by Arthur Vollmer. Volume II of United States Selective Service System, Special Monograph No. 1: Backgrounds of Selective Service. 14 parts. Washington, 1947.
Another example:
Franco-Gallia: or, an Account of the Ancient Free State of France, and Most other Parts of Europe, before the Loss of their Liberties. Written Originally in Latin by the Famous Civilian Francis Hotoman, In the Year 1574. 2nd edition. London, 1721.
You get the picture.
The history behind our 2nd Amendment, is tremendous.
My passion for all this, is that I do not want for our country to suffer thru the horrendous tragedies of nationalizing socialism, which is a leftist excuse to create a police state immediately in the wake of parading “social justice” as the bait.
The leftists are obsessed with defining who people are, what people need, and controlling every step.
That is a proven path to Auschwitz, Dachau, Bergen Belsen and others.
Our fathers fought *against that.*
It is almost as if we are mounted in pursuit of an intersection at which we plan to intercept the dreadful ambitions of the socialists and attempt to get them to see some light before going any further.