Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dutchwrangler" data-source="post: 1622586" data-attributes="member: 4650">This is a given in the context of defending the individual's right to Life, Liberty & Property. The bearing of arms, being a human right, translates to each individual being able to defend themselves. This is the basic building block upon which the militia is founded. The Revolution at it's basics level was not fought by an organized army, but a collection of individuals freely fighting for their self interests. It is why the 2A states that the security of a free state depends on the militia.I understand that people want to take the stance that the US needs to have a standing army. This belief contradicts the thinking of the Founders. They had just fought a war against a standing army and knew well enough that a standing army, answerable to no one but those in power, could be used against them... again. The only military branch authorized by the Constitution is the navy. At that time, the ability of naval forces could only penetrate inland a certain distance because of logistical limitations. The people, if set upon by the Navy by the command of those in charge, could retreat inland whatever distance to escape attack. As each male was to be a part of the militia, they could then regroup and plan accordingly beyond the range of naval forces.I know, my thinking is beyond that of the flag wavers. Thesw views I hold aren't original to me. They come from studying the words, the events and the times at which the Constitution was written. And of course of the history of man in general. The militia is viewed by most citizens as antiquated. Yet, the 2A specifically states that security of the free State is directly tied to the militia. The 2A makes no mention of giving the responsibility of security to a standing army.The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are not a disjointed group of articles, sections and clauses. Each is presented in a specific sequence to address specific concerns. They are connected to the reality of what the Revolutionist had experienced and reflect their mindset. I highly recommend that citizens who want to understand the Constitution read "The Original Constitution" written by Robert G. Natelson for starters. In my study of the militia, the prime thing to remember is that no member is under the control of any government official. The militia is to be an autonomous, citizen defense force that does not answer to government officials. And because of this, government officials can not take control of them and use them against other citizens. Again, take this concept and square it with the experiences the Revolutionist had just undergone with Britian.In summary, the responsibility of defense starts with the individual defending themselves without reliance upon the police (agents of the government). From that point individuals gather together into militia units where common sense dictates training in the art of war. Militias are then able to be called by the Sovereign States. And if necessary, the US Congress, after declaring war, can then forth the militia to form a temporary army to battle attacks against the confederation by outside invaders.</blockquote>

Verification