Posted on Aug 20, 2019
When will everyone be reporting for drills with the "well regulated militia "?
6.49K
112
71
13
13
0
I think it's time to discuss the 2nd Amendment frankly and honestly.
I can't help but notice that people are obsessed with their "rights", but are completely silent about their responsibilities. We forget that the amendment has a purpose statement. The importance of a free standing, well armed, well trained "well regulated militia".
I'd like to politely point out that congress at the time the 2nd amendment was drafted was also kind enough to spell out precisely what the militia was composed of, and give guidance on the training and leadership requirements....
We'll ignore the racist part of it, "able bodied white males"...
But it's pretty explicit. Each and every free, able bodied white male between 18 and 45 is to be enrolled by the Captain in each state, provide their own arms and ammo, and attend regular drills and exercises, and when called upon.
So when are you all showing up for your well regulated militia drills? You want your guns, but none of the training and discipline the founding fathers expected you to have WITH those guns.
I expect to see a lot more of you at formation from here on out!
I can't help but notice that people are obsessed with their "rights", but are completely silent about their responsibilities. We forget that the amendment has a purpose statement. The importance of a free standing, well armed, well trained "well regulated militia".
I'd like to politely point out that congress at the time the 2nd amendment was drafted was also kind enough to spell out precisely what the militia was composed of, and give guidance on the training and leadership requirements....
We'll ignore the racist part of it, "able bodied white males"...
But it's pretty explicit. Each and every free, able bodied white male between 18 and 45 is to be enrolled by the Captain in each state, provide their own arms and ammo, and attend regular drills and exercises, and when called upon.
So when are you all showing up for your well regulated militia drills? You want your guns, but none of the training and discipline the founding fathers expected you to have WITH those guns.
I expect to see a lot more of you at formation from here on out!
Posted in these groups: 
Firearms and Guns
2nd Amendment
Firearms and Guns 2nd Amendment
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 23
0
0
0
As soon as the Captain comes by and enrolls me. Oh, and calls me out for drill.
You seem to completely skip over that part.
You seem to completely skip over that part.
(0)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
You are supposed to report for enrollment.
Go find your nearest NG recruiter. That responsibility is explicitly given to you.
Your Company Commander will subsequently provide you your drill schedule.
Go find your nearest NG recruiter. That responsibility is explicitly given to you.
Your Company Commander will subsequently provide you your drill schedule.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SFC Michael Hasbun Nope. Learn to read, brotherman. The responsibility is explicitly given to the Commander.
"And it shall at all times hereafter be the duty of every such captain or commanding officer of a company to enrol every such citizen... and shall without delay notify such citizen of the enrolment..."
"And shall appear... WHEN CALLED OUT TO EXERCISE..."
As I said, when the Captain comes by to enroll me, I'll gladly sign up. And when he calls me out to drill, I'll happily show up, complete with rifle and ammo. I'll even bring 30 rounds so I have some to spare if one of my battle buddies is short a few.
But until that time, your argument is moot.
"And it shall at all times hereafter be the duty of every such captain or commanding officer of a company to enrol every such citizen... and shall without delay notify such citizen of the enrolment..."
"And shall appear... WHEN CALLED OUT TO EXERCISE..."
As I said, when the Captain comes by to enroll me, I'll gladly sign up. And when he calls me out to drill, I'll happily show up, complete with rifle and ammo. I'll even bring 30 rounds so I have some to spare if one of my battle buddies is short a few.
But until that time, your argument is moot.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Can you cite cases in post-revolutionary war America where the states or federal government disarmed the population that was not part of a "free standing, well armed, well trained "well regulated militia?"
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
LTC Eugene Chu - Are you implying that the founding fathers were against the right to keep and bear arms by individual private citizens, unless they were part of a "free standing, well-armed, well trained "well-regulated militia?" But it took them 143 years to get around to it? If they did intend to disarm those who were not part of the organized militias. Perhaps I framed my question poorly. Can you show me any examples by the founding fathers and the men of their generation to disarm the entire population that was not part of an organized militia?
Taxing weapons is not outright disarming the population. It is however, using the tax code a social warfare weapon. That social warfare weapon leaves arms in the hands of the well-to-do and disproportionately disarms the impoverished. That leads to the question, are the progressives/liberals attempting to use the tax code to keep weapons from the hands of minorities, who are disproportionately affected by poverty? Anyone, who has the money, and a clean criminal background may apply and receive a federal firearms license that will allow them to legally own an automatic weapon.
18 U.S. Code § 926A - Interstate transportation of firearms
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
Taxing weapons is not outright disarming the population. It is however, using the tax code a social warfare weapon. That social warfare weapon leaves arms in the hands of the well-to-do and disproportionately disarms the impoverished. That leads to the question, are the progressives/liberals attempting to use the tax code to keep weapons from the hands of minorities, who are disproportionately affected by poverty? Anyone, who has the money, and a clean criminal background may apply and receive a federal firearms license that will allow them to legally own an automatic weapon.
18 U.S. Code § 926A - Interstate transportation of firearms
Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Why this old stuff shows up is beyond me but here goes.
Militias are covered in the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is just ONE of the guaranteed "INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS" found in the Bill of Rights.
Militias are covered in the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is just ONE of the guaranteed "INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS" found in the Bill of Rights.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Sir George Tucker: “The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits…and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – Sir George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia in I Blackstone COMMENTARIES Sir George Tucker Ed., 1803, pg. 300 (App.)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Thomas Jefferson: “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”, Proposal for a Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334 (C.J. Boyd, Ed. 1950)
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
LTC Eugene Chu - "The 1860 federal census enumerated almost four million enslaved African Americans and just under five hundred thousand free African Americans, nationwide. "
https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Free_African_Americans_Before_the_Civil_War_(National_Institute)
https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Free_African_Americans_Before_the_Civil_War_(National_Institute)
Free African Americans Before the Civil War (National Institute)
The 1860 federal census enumerated almost four million enslaved African Americans and just under five hundred thousand free African Americans, nationwide. Nearly every African American family present during this period descended at some point from slaves, though some free families of color lived in the American colonies going back to the seventeenth century.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Thomas Jefferson In his Commonplace Book, Jefferson quotes Cesare Beccaria from his seminal work, On Crimes and Punishment: “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Patrick Henry: “Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? 3 Elliot Debates 168-169.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Alexander Hamilton: “The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No.2
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
What is the "militia clause" all about?
It is a nominative absolute (prefatory clause) that states a reason why the Government will not so much as "infringe" on the "right of the people to keep and bear Arms".
The 2nd Amendment does NOT:
-- grant a right, the "rights of the people" are preexisting and inherent in their Human nature
-- those rights are stated and guaranteed to the people, not "granted" to them by Government.
The "militia clause" does NOT:
-- state the reason the people's right to arms exists, to serve the need of the state (USA and/or "states of the Union")
-- it merely states why a Constitutional Government would not WANT to restrict the people's right to arms. Such a Government would deprive itself of its primary defense, "the militia". Since standing armies were viewed as "a danger to Liberty" the Government was dependent on the militia, drawn from the armed citizenry.
It is a nominative absolute (prefatory clause) that states a reason why the Government will not so much as "infringe" on the "right of the people to keep and bear Arms".
The 2nd Amendment does NOT:
-- grant a right, the "rights of the people" are preexisting and inherent in their Human nature
-- those rights are stated and guaranteed to the people, not "granted" to them by Government.
The "militia clause" does NOT:
-- state the reason the people's right to arms exists, to serve the need of the state (USA and/or "states of the Union")
-- it merely states why a Constitutional Government would not WANT to restrict the people's right to arms. Such a Government would deprive itself of its primary defense, "the militia". Since standing armies were viewed as "a danger to Liberty" the Government was dependent on the militia, drawn from the armed citizenry.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google