Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
27. Not at all. You are wrong here. The Constitution uses the term "the Militia"
Tue Apr 2, 2013, 11:25 AM
Apr 2013

and the term "the Militia of the several States". They mean the same thing, the same entities ("militia" here is plural -like "fish&quot , the same as those mandated exist under the Articles, those provided for with the militia acts, and existed in the common wealths for decades. Only how they were to be organized and discipline (and used in constitutional roles) changed much (per federal regulations).

They are one and the same - today there would be 50 of them. There was NO federal militia, only STATE militias called forth in federal service.

"Militia Act of 1792,
Second Congress, Session I. Chapter XXVIII
Passed May 2, 1792,
providing for the authority of the President to call out the Militia

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever the United States shall be invaded, or be in imminent danger of invasion from any foreign nation or Indian tribe, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, to call forth such number of the militia of the state or states most convenient to the place of danger...

it shall be lawful for the President of the United States to call forth the militia of such state to suppress such combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed. And if the militia of a state, where such combinations may happen, shall refuse, or be insufficient to suppress the same, it shall be lawful for the President, if the legislature of the United States be not in session, to call forth and employ such numbers of , the militia of any other state or states


"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United
States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service"

"provide for calling forth the Militia to..."

"...provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for
governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United
States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers,
and the Authority of training the Militia
according to the discipline
prescribed by Congress


There was no federal militia till the creation of the National Guard.


I have read Bogus - interesting, but as shown, hardly the complete picture. You might want to read some other sources. I suggest starting with the constitution, then the early Militia Acts where congress 1st used their power re: how to organize and call forth the state militias in federal service.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I renounce my 2nd amendment right [View all] jimmy the one Mar 2013 OP
Okay. nt rrneck Mar 2013 #1
Thanks for explaining all of that. Many of us agree with you completely. freshwest Mar 2013 #2
Thanks for the notification. Flatulo Mar 2013 #3
the rich were still the rich back then pasto76 Mar 2013 #4
I read that as "chased a duck through a parking lot" Robb Mar 2013 #6
In his defense Orrex Mar 2013 #10
If everyone did as you have done than only nobody would have guns. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #5
So what is the "real" 2013 meaning of the 2A? Is it a complete anachronism? geckosfeet Mar 2013 #7
An anachronism because of the Civil War. And now willfully misinterpreted. Loudly Mar 2013 #16
Fine with me. It's a free country. closeupready Mar 2013 #8
Well you really don't have to relinguish any Right Whoopdedoo Mar 2013 #9
I don't own any guns mercymechap Mar 2013 #11
That’s just like, your opinion, man... Malik Agar Mar 2013 #12
Almost Funny. Mine Was Taken ProgressiveJarhead Mar 2013 #13
I agree with you. airplaneman Mar 2013 #14
As long as guns are legal, MicaelS Mar 2013 #15
The mental health aspect is all fine and wonderful... and totally unrealistic. world wide wally Mar 2013 #17
I gave mine up for Lent. jmg257 Mar 2013 #18
Spot on, Jimmy! CapnSteve Mar 2013 #19
How would the free states end slave patrols? Nothing at all about jmg257 Mar 2013 #21
OK, Let me fill in the gaps for you... CapnSteve Apr 2013 #24
Familiar with all that. So how could the congress dis-ban the state militias? jmg257 Apr 2013 #25
You are confusing federal militias with state militias (aka slave patrols)... CapnSteve Apr 2013 #26
Not at all. You are wrong here. The Constitution uses the term "the Militia" jmg257 Apr 2013 #27
OK, now you are just playing with semantics... CapnSteve Apr 2013 #28
Semantics?? What we are REALLY illustrating here is the VERY VALID USE of STATE militias jmg257 Apr 2013 #30
Because there was no federal militias, the congress had powers... jmg257 Apr 2013 #29
revanchism jimmy the one Apr 2013 #31
Ha - as usual - words of wisdom! (And what I have been saying all along ;)) jmg257 Apr 2013 #32
Just don't give up my 2A rights for me. ileus Mar 2013 #20
You are certainly free to do so. Peter cotton Mar 2013 #22
revisionist history - 2ndA jimmy the one Mar 2013 #23
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»I renounce my 2nd amendme...»Reply #27