GUN A question about the "militia"

Discussion in 'On Topic' started by zumin3k, Aug 19, 2008.

  1. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    As I understand it (and I may be completely wrong), the militia is intended to be a body of private citizens who are separate from the government and standing Army, who can defend their state/region in times when the government/Army is unable to respond, or to "hold the line" so to speak, until they do.
    Yet it is illegal to form a Militia or undergo military style training outside of the military.
    :squint:
     
  2. hsmith

    hsmith OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2002
    Messages:
    124,609
    Likes Received:
    710
    Location:
    Your mother.
    In VA a militia is composed of all able bodied men, whether you join or not :mamoru:
     
  3. more off

    more off Moderator

    Joined:
    May 29, 2004
    Messages:
    71,662
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Tacoma
    its not illegal to get military style training, is it ?

    what about that jew camp in the NE that makes little jewish soldiers
     
  4. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    It might be just a CA thing.
     
  5. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    So if 500 able bodied men get together with their weapons for training and what not, how do you think that would go over? It does say "Well-regulated militia". Can't be well regulated without training, right?
     
  6. more off

    more off Moderator

    Joined:
    May 29, 2004
    Messages:
    71,662
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Tacoma
    the local SWAT / national guard / military would be dispatched to eradicate terrorists
     
  7. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Yeah, that's my point.
    There are serious inconsistencies with the way the libs/gun grabbers want things
    " You can only have guns if you're in a Militia"
    "Ok, I'm in the Militia"
    "No you're not, the Militia is the Government"

    Shit makes no sense.
     
  8. "Regulated" meant "trained" when they wrote the amendment.
     
  9. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    I agree. But the gov won't allow a well regulated militia at all.
    I'd like to see what would happen if men in every state started arming and training themselves, as a militia.
     
  10. TL1000RSquid

    TL1000RSquid ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    14,257
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NY
    and 80% of the members will be undercover ATF agents.
     
  11. more off

    more off Moderator

    Joined:
    May 29, 2004
    Messages:
    71,662
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Tacoma
    :roflw:
     
  12. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    "Damn the Constitution, you shouldn't be in a Militia, OR have these guns. Terrorist bastards"
     
  13. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Ok, I must have been getting bad info over on Calguns. From what I've read, "Military style" training is illegal for civilians.
    Glad to hear this isn't true, but my confusion about the militia stands.
     
  14. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    I'll try to find something. It was a while ago.
     
  15. zumin3k

    zumin3k New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Thanks for the find. I think I may have misunderstood people talking about it already being illegal.
     
  16. yar1182

    yar1182 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura California
    California has several militia. There is one in Los Angles. they go out in the desert and run around and shoot their rifles, climb ropes and all sorts of nonsense.

    As far as the Constitution the militia is all able bodies men. Their job is to be able to over throw the government if the government over stepped their bounds. If this were to be followed as intended than those able bodied men would need arms of appropriate type where they would have some sort of chance. Granted that doesn't mean air craft carriers or tanks but I would think military style rifles including class 3.
     
  17. more off

    more off Moderator

    Joined:
    May 29, 2004
    Messages:
    71,662
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    Tacoma

    we at least need a buncha 4x4 trucks with huge machine guns mounted in the rear and more FA weapons to lay down cover fire :mad:
     
  18. PC Principle

    PC Principle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    64,143
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't you get it yet? The Government wants you to just pay taxes and not question their authority.
     
  19. amac88

    amac88 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,826
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Plano, Texas
    They didnt expect the government to have tanks, jet aircraft, etc. It would be almost impossible to overthrow the government nowadays. I say almost because with enough people, it could be done, but it would take a long time and require people to work together. Lots of people would not give a crap what the government did, as long as their little world was not affected.
     
  20. Soybomb

    Soybomb New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    Messages:
    9,041
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Illinois
    This is really a very tired old argument. Superior technology or force doesn't necessarily ensure victory. We have the firepower to blow houses up to get rid of mice but that really doesn't help us in any practical way. What are the tanks and jets going to do, level entire cities because there are undesireables there? See the current problem in Iraq for the real time demonstration of the flaw in your thinking.
     
  21. yar1182

    yar1182 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura California
    In reality the people would have a hell of a time over throwing the goverment. If properly armed they will be able to stand up to the goverment and make them think twice if they are about to do something unthinkable.

    Say they decided they were going to go door to door and draft every male fighting age for the army, or grab huge tracks of land and not compensate people for loss of property, or grab everybody of ethnicy and put them in a concentration camp. Granted this kind of stuff is unthinkable as reality here, but it happens in other parts of the world. Why is that? Because the dictators in those parts of the world make sure the people are unarmed.
     
  22. smartypants

    smartypants New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    39,065
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    1861
    You'll know because they'll be the ones who can touch their toes.
     
  23. vwpilot

    vwpilot New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,596
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually that is not true at all. In the times of the constitution, "well regulated" had nothing to do with training, organization, or anything of the like.

    At the time, "well regulated" meant someone that, essentially, wasnt a criminal or trouble maker. Someone that was well regulated was someone that was law abiding and "regulated" in terms of the law.

    So, in the Constitution, when they refer to a "well regulated militia" they meant a militia made up of people that were law abiding and well behaved men.

    In many states, the state constitutions put the militia as any able bodied man that was not already in the proper military.

    Therefore, a well regulated militia was all able bodied men not already in the military that are law abiding citizens.

    It had nothing to do with training or organization. It was part of the basis for the Heller case to dispute the idea that if one was not in an organized militia they still had the right to keep and bear arms.
     
  24. http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf

    It's interesting that you brought up Heller, as the justices actually specifically addressed what was meant by the term "regulated."
    Go to page 23. It's in the last paragraph on that page. :)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 20, 2008
  25. kellyclan

    kellyclan She only loves you when she's drunk.

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    18,944
    Likes Received:
    0

    Not really nitpicking, but I'm pretty sure I've seen Vickers post that he only works in "free" states to avoid issues with transporting firearms.
     

Share This Page