Oklahoma State Militia?

[MLR]

A hypothetical question.
If the Oklahoma legislature were to create a State Militia or it was put into the State Constitution would it protect gun owners if the Supreme Court ever rules that the 2nd Amendment refers to a collective right?
Say if the law or amendment specified all citizens above a certain age are members of the militia?

Would this be an approach to take legislatively to protect our rights? You would then meet the requirement of being in a State militia and would be protected if a future ruling goes bad.

Michael

 

[been]

i dont know what im talking about but i heard somewhere that the Federal Government was in control of the nations Defense.

and i cant answer your question...sorry.

 

[MLR]

When the Constitution was written the only militias were controlled by the States. The Governors of the individual States were in charge not the Federal Government.

Michael

 

[been]

When the Constitution was written the only militias were controlled by the States. The Governors of the individual States were in charge not the Federal Government.

Michael

why did they get rid of the militias?

 

[dieseltech09]

why did they get rid of the militias?

Isn't the National Guard considered a State Militia?

 

[aestus]

President Bush federalized the National Guard. Governors control the guard in times of peace, but the President can gain control of them in times of crisis, terrorist attack, epidemic, public health hazards or natural disasters. Ultimately, it was congress who gave the president this power over the National Guard.

I could be wrong, but I believe it was result of Katrina and Bush wanted to control the Louisiana National Guard, but the Governor didn't want to relinquish control, which lead to Congress changing the Insurrection Act.

 

[WTJ]

It is called a State Defense Force. No, it's not the NG, yes, it's not only legal, but supported by state and federal law. Oklahoma has it on the books, but it is currently inactive. There were several attempts in the past by a SGAUS-affiliated group to reactivate the State Guard to no avail. For an idea of how it works look up Texas State Guard. The federal government recognizes state defense forces under 32 U.S.C. § 109 which provides that state defense forces as a whole may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces of the United States, thus preserving their separation from the National Guard. SDF members, however, are not exempt from conscription under Selective Service regulations. SDF's are partially regulated by the National Guard Bureau.

 

[WTJ]

President Bush federalized the National Guard. Governors control the guard in times of peace, but the President can gain control of them in times of crisis, terrorist attack, epidemic, public health hazards or natural disasters. Ultimately, it was congress who gave the president this power over the National Guard.

I could be wrong, but I believe it was result of Katrina and Bush wanted to control the Louisiana National Guard, but the Governor didn't want to relinquish control, which lead to Congress changing the Insurrection Act.

The Militia Act of 1903, which created the National Guard, put the Guardsman in the corresponding Reserve forces, making them eligible for Federal activation and service. Refer to several civil rights issues where the state Governor called out the Guard under state control to enforce segregation, then the Guard was federalized and ordered to enforce desegregation.

 

[WTJ]

I think the modification to the Insurrection Act was intended to further reduce the authority of the Posse Comitatus Act (possibly the shortest law in the US Code) to allow the use of ANY component of US Forces: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/335.html

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both". Posse Comitatus Act.

(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--
(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--
(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and
(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or
(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).
(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--
(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

 

[MLR]

It is called a State Defense Force. No, it's not the NG, yes, it's not only legal, but supported by state and federal law. Oklahoma has it on the books, but it is currently inactive. There were several attempts in the past by a SGAUS-affiliated group to reactivate the State Guard to no avail. For an idea of how it works look up Texas State Guard. The federal government recognizes state defense forces under 32 U.S.C. § 109 which provides that state defense forces as a whole may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces of the United States, thus preserving their separation from the National Guard. SDF members, however, are not exempt from conscription under Selective Service regulations. SDF's are partially regulated by the National Guard Bureau.

This is what I am referring to. If the anti's have their way and get a Court decision stating that the right to bear arms is a collective one applying only to the militias would this not protect the right in our State? Could this be an answer to the problem?
Justice Ginsberg has already stated that Heller was incorrect and that the 2nd refers to a collective and not an individual right. He thinking eludes me as I was always taught that only people have rights. That governments have powers. That the Constitution refers to the Governments powers and the peoples rights.

Michael