« IG gunwalking testimony delayed | Main | Fast & Furious: the fingerpointing begins »
The Unorganized Militia
Glenn Reynolds has some serious thoughts about an under-rated asset.
4 Comments | Leave a comment
It’s a great idea, a nice thought, but I highly doubt the federal government, despite the mention of Americans’ right to organized militia in the US Constitution, will ever really support such groups, total control being as seductive as it is.
A use of the unorganized militia for domestic anti-terrorist operations is a wonderful idea, but the one premise that Mr Reynolds uses--government trust of the armed yeomanry--does not exist in 2012. And has not existed since the late 1950s.
Our overlords today do not trust us at all, because they are preparing this country through their own devious behavior for internal security actions against selected American citizens. Gun owners are near the top of that list.
Ultimately, the government will lose that fight--and rightfully so--but that is not something that enters their small addled minds today. And the ability to provide our own security assistance is readily sacrificed in pursuit of that obscene and nefarious goal.
I believe the article only defines the 2nd Amendment, of which I totally agree. However, the reason for debate is how the unorganized militia is directed. It was never intended to be just regular gun owners, but a community effort of individual gun owners, officers, and a committee of safety.
There is no such thing as the unorganized militia. That is a lie perpetrated by usurpers.
Congress has no authority to make part organized and part unorganized. The ONLY power is to organize the Militia, a power that DOES NOT convey authority to split the militia or to define the militia. The militia act of 1792/3 is illegal because organizing does not grant power to decide who is a member. It only grants the power to take what is there and "organize" it.
Too long we have allowed judges and other usurpers to lie to us, to steal authority to not granted. Judges do not have the authority to define constitutional terms because judges are subordinate to the Constitution. Defining terms in the Constitution requires superiority to the Constitution, something that neither Congress nor the judges nor the President have.