Given the terrorist activity would you support a citizen militia?

You've got me really curious, I've never really researched it before. But given Madison's role in the creation of the Constitution and founding of our government, combined with his intimate experiences in the war of 1812. His thoughts on the Militia after the war would be fascinating. I'll have to see what I can find when I get a some time I can dedicate to it.

I don't expect any of it would change my mind, I still believe in the ideal that is a citizen militia over large standing armies. IMO the war of 1812 isn't a lesson against militia, it's a lesson in maintaining a strong militia. One very capable, vary enthusiastic, and more so then compelled to, but willing to fight.

 

Under America's current federal militia laws, any American male who doesn't own and isn't in possession of a military style rifle is in violation of the militia laws of the United States and isn't upholding the Constitution.

The federal government and states that pass laws restricting the possession of military style weapons and high capacity magazines are in violation of the Constitution.

Those who wrote these unlawful anti gun laws and those who voted for them should be classified as enemies of the state. All should be required to register with the State Department as a foreign agent.

 

Really? I'd really like to see a current law that says that.

 

I've been debating APACH for quite some time -- and there is not a single post of his where he has a grasp on the facts (not mention his terroristic call to pick off thousands of "*******s" in his self-proclaimed unorganized militia) .

He's referring to the Militia act of 1792 (which I noted earlier) -- but fails to note it was superseded by the Dick Act (yes, that's the real name) of 1903. [Militia Act of 1903,]

 

That's always been my understanding as well, I don't like it, I think it's unconstitutional. But for now it is what it is.

 

I am fine with people freely associating and training together and all of that. It's whether or not they have any authority to give orders to others that concerns me, and what exactly it is that they'll be doing as a militia. I look at this just like I look at most civil rights issues. In the course of being a militia, are they going to break the law, infringe or abuse people's rights, and if they do, to whose authority do they answer? If they are to be given any type of power to enforce the law and give orders, they must also be accountable for their actions using that authority.

I do not wish to stop people freely associating, I'm just concerned about any authority granted, implied, or assumed because of the manner of that free association.

 

Militia has no more authority then a citizen.

They can't order you to do jack. They can't break the law or infringe on anyone's rights. If they do they answer to law enforcement or you. They have the same power to enforce law that YOU do.

 

And what is the source for your statistical judgment that "more often than not the American people are daily heroes"? I'm not denying that there are heroes, new ones everyday, it's a big country. But you're trying to make a huge blanket judgment about the entirety of America, and it's kind of a stretch. And, how do I know that it isn't the "nots" in your statement that will be joining these militias? Like most things it would probably be a mix of folks.

I know many people around here, to varying levels. A few I would trust, many I'd probably be on the fence about until I had more information, and some I wouldn't want to have the authority to even order a squirrel around. To be honest, anybody acting with any force of law that may weapons needs to be more than just an after-work and weekend group. There needs to be accountability, and chain of command. How well you know the people and your subjective judgments on their character don't replace that need.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=432426&p=1065554523#post1065554523

 

militia cannot act until they are called to act by the Governor.

they have no authority or power to arrest anyone unless they witness a crime being committed.

they can then detain someone until the police show up.

 

Exactly. The militia is an alternative to the military, not an alternative to law enforcement officers.

 

Federal and State law is very clear about the Unorganized Militia.

it cannot simply suppliment the state police, local police, sheriff's department, just cause they feel like it

 

FWIW originally organized militia was tasked with supporting law enforcement. Organized only and not since 1903 though.

 

and the Organized Militia took orders from officers and supervisors selected by the government.

they were trained, supervised, and armed by the govt.

they weren't a bunch of armed bafoons running around with guns, acting like vigilantes detaining and trying and executing people, just cause they felt like it.

 

If the government does nothing we will need to arm ourselves and train ourselves how to take out a psychopathic Jihadist doing something similar as in France here on U.S. soil. Neither the military nor the police will be able to protect anyone in time to prevent some shooter from a mass shooting. We need to have citizens going out and into venues (theaters, clubs, concerts, sports arenas, etc. armed. Time to get tough folks.

 

if they have a CCW, that's fine.

but citizens only have the right to detain people AFTER they see a crime being commited.

 

Way to hawk your militia group, the MoG. http://www.no-debts.com/anti-federalist/defense.html

This is the real Georgia State Defense Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_State_Defense_Force

 

Well I already provided a link to who is the unorganized militia in America, you and I are. Unless you're on active duty in the U.S. military or are a member of the reserves or state National Guard.

Each state has it's own laws dealing with the unorganized militia. Here in California the unorganized militia has been called to arms three times post Civil War. The Spanish-American War, WW l and WW ll. They were required to provide their own rifles and supply their own uniforms based upon the U.S. Army's uniform at the time. They would become known as the "Home Guard."

In California the County Sheriff is appointed to command the unorganized militia when called to arms. In large cities it would be the Chief of Police. They would appoint usually a retired Army field grade officer or former General to command and lead the unorganized militia/Home Guard.

 

Yes a CCW should come with training on how to act in such a situation as what happened in Paris. Teach how to obtain tactical advantage, the best cover, etc. Embrace guns as being part of the culture and stop punishing everyone and making them afraid of owning/carrying one.

 

All your (*)(*)(*)(*)ing "citizen militia" is going to do is arm the neighborhood bullies. I have enough problems with the ****** poachers trespassing on my property and shooting at my family and my pets without some (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) giving them the color of law. In the last decade I've been subjected to far more terrorism (not that any of these dohwads could really scare a 9 old girl) from the ****** (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s in my area than I will ever see from any other source and I am sick to death of it.

(*)(*)(*)(*) the guns, all most gun advocates really want is carte blanche to go around and kill whatever person or animal they happen to feel like. I don't see how any sane person can want that and I have come to the conclusion that, IMO, all the gun nuts are just that, nuts. And IMO all the ISIS jerks were was gun nuts with a 'cause' and that's all ANY gun nut really needs to go off, as we are well aware, or should be if we're acting as rational people ourselves. We should institutionalize them with compassionate care and study them carefully to see what makes people go so ****** crazy, but we should definitely not let them out in society, let alone arm them.

 

With all the expletive deleteds, your post was barely incomprehensible. I disagree with your characterization. In Kennesaw, Georgia it is mandatory to have a firearm in your home. It is the law. Kennesaw has the LOWEST crime rate of any city in America.

In terms of numbers, Cobb County (where Kennesaw is located) has the second highest number of citizen militia members of any county in Georgia (we have over 150 counties here.)

Due to several decades of informing the public and educating the militia members, they all realize that we have a Right and a Duty... even the Obligation to fight tyranny. While we are required to exhaust all nonviolent legal and political avenues of redress, the militia has the Right to resort to extraordinary measures if and when the political and legal process fails to protect / preserve Liberty.

That's not being nutty. It is what the founding fathers wanted us to do... bear in mind those men who signed the Declaration of Independence formed the nucleus of what would morph into this country's first citizen militia.

 

Yeah. That's not true. https://www.truthorfiction.com/theres-a-mandatory-gun-ownership-law-in-kennesaw-georgia/

The founding fathers didn't form units of vigilantes.

 

Here's a solution to the state militia issue within the modern context:

1) give back full control of the National Guard to the states.

2) make participation in the National Guard a civic duty (would, obviously, have to be done at the state level, but most states could easily be enticed to do so).

Job done. You have a series of state militias to stand up against terrorism, AND against fascism.

 

Over 99.9% of all gun owners will never be involved in a crime, will never have an accident, and will never be responsible for anyone's death.

If you have problems with poachers actually threatening you at gunpoint, I suggest fortifying your home. Claymores are good for that. And you're fortunate enough to live in a country where you are legally allowed to defend your family.

If you lived in England, the chances of you staring down the barrel of a gun are nearly as good as here, but you would not be legally allowed to defend yourself in kind.

 

That's all America should have, that was made quite clear by the founding fathers.

We seem to have forgotten about that since we are now asking that very question.