State Militia ?

[Kurr]

My grandma used to cut his hair, in Henryville when she was a beautician!

 

[ModernGunner]

A "militia" is not, nor has it ever been (at least, in the U.S.) a 'formal', uniformed 'army', like the Indiana National Guard.

A "militia" is a group of private citizens (which may or may not be 'organized', depending on one's definition) which stand armed and 'at the ready' until / if needed.

A "well-regulated militia" is one that is 'organized', meaning there's some 'structure' and 'order' to the group of citizens. This may mean there's a 'central leader' or the larger group organized into sub-groups, each with a defined set of different but complimentary objectives.

That term, "well-regulated militia", is frequently and intentionally misinterpreted by the lefty-loons to mean something it does not mean, typically citing the National Guard or similar 'formal' organization. Solely to further their lefty-loon agenda.

SOME where on INGO, some time back, a long and concise definition of the 2nd Amendment was provided, defining each relevant term and phrase, in order of appearance in the 2nd Amendment. The sum total of those definitions is that U.S. Citizens are to own and carry firearms and be 'at the ready' to defend both themselves and the persons and lands around them.

That's what the 2nd Amendment says, by the very definitions of the 27 words contained within it. There is no other, valid, 'interpretation'.

 

[SteveM4A1]

A "militia" is not, nor has it ever been (at least, in the U.S.) a 'formal', uniformed 'army', like the Indiana National Guard.

A "militia" is a group of private citizens (which may or may not be 'organized', depending on one's definition) which stand armed and 'at the ready' until / if needed.

A "well-regulated militia" is one that is 'organized', meaning there's some 'structure' and 'order' to the group of citizens. This may mean there's a 'central leader' or the larger group organized into sub-groups, each with a defined set of different but complimentary objectives.

That term, "well-regulated militia", is frequently and intentionally misinterpreted by the lefty-loons to mean something it does not mean, typically citing the National Guard or similar 'formal' organization. Solely to further their lefty-loon agenda.

SOME where on INGO, some time back, a long and concise definition of the 2nd Amendment was provided, defining each relevant term and phrase, in order of appearance in the 2nd Amendment. The sum total of those definitions is that U.S. Citizens are to own and carry firearms and be 'at the ready' to defend both themselves and the persons and lands around them.

That's what the 2nd Amendment says, by the very definitions of the 27 words contained within it. There is no other, valid, 'interpretation'.

I believe you are referring to this article...at least I think it is pretty good.

J. Neil Schulman: The Unabridged Second Amendment

 

[Bill of Rights]

A "militia" is not, nor has it ever been (at least, in the U.S.) a 'formal', uniformed 'army', like the Indiana National Guard.

A "militia" is a group of private citizens (which may or may not be 'organized', depending on one's definition) which stand armed and 'at the ready' until / if needed.

A "well-regulated militia" is one that is 'organized', meaning there's some 'structure' and 'order' to the group of citizens. This may mean there's a 'central leader' or the larger group organized into sub-groups, each with a defined set of different but complimentary objectives.

That term, "well-regulated militia", is frequently and intentionally misinterpreted by the lefty-loons to mean something it does not mean, typically citing the National Guard or similar 'formal' organization. Solely to further their lefty-loon agenda.

SOME where on INGO, some time back, a long and concise definition of the 2nd Amendment was provided, defining each relevant term and phrase, in order of appearance in the 2nd Amendment. The sum total of those definitions is that U.S. Citizens are to own and carry firearms and be 'at the ready' to defend both themselves and the persons and lands around them.

That's what the 2nd Amendment says, by the very definitions of the 27 words contained within it. There is no other, valid, 'interpretation'.

Mostly, you're correct, however the law defining what the militia is goes back a very long time (upwards of 100 years, IIRC, but I'm going solely from memory here. I want to say it's in Title 10 USC, but not sure) and it specifies that the NG constitutes the organized militia, while the rest of us males between 17 and 44 comprise the unorganized militia.

I am not arguing your primary point, only that detail.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Robjps]

Makes sense to me. At least withholding certain military grade equipment from the populace.

You realize all the examples listed are already owned by civilians and somehow we haven't died yet.

 

[BigMoose]

Just to stir the pot, here is the original PRE 1936 wording.

Wonder why they went thru the trouble of messing with it in 1974. I am guessing they removed the word white in 1936

Indiana's well regulated militia is all persons of military age 17 and above. Article 12 of the Indiana Constitution.

ARTICLE 12. Militia
Section 1. Composition

Section 1. A militia shall be provided and shall consist of all persons over the age of seventeen (17) years, except those persons who may be exempted by the laws of the United States or of this state. The militia may be divided into active and inactive classes and consist of such military organizations as may be provided by law.
(History: As Amended November 3, 1936; November 5, 1974).

Section 2. Commander-in-chief

Section 2. The Governor is Commander-in-Chief of the militia and other military forces of this state.
(History: As Amended November 5, 1974).

Section 3. Adjutant general

Section 3. There shall be an Adjutant General, who shall be appointed by the Governor.
(History: As Amended November 5, 1974).

Section 4. Conscientious objectors

Section 4. No person, conscientiously opposed to bearing arms, shall be compelled to do so in the militia.
(History: As Amended November 5, 1974).

Section 5. Repealed

(Repealed November 5, 1974).
Section 6. Repealed

Source last updated 1999

 

[Thor]

Just to stir the pot, here is the original PRE 1936 wording.

Wonder why they went thru the trouble of messing with it in 1974. I am guessing they removed the word white in 1936

Also apparently the word male. And the non-white man they would have been referring to in this corner of the North West Territory would have been the red man....

 

[Thor]

Mostly, you're correct, however the law defining what the militia is goes back a very long time (upwards of 100 years, IIRC, but I'm going solely from memory here. I want to say it's in Title 10 USC, but not sure) and it specifies that the NG constitutes the organized militia, while the rest of us males between 17 and 44 comprise the unorganized militia.

I am not arguing your primary point, only that detail.

Blessings,
Bill

Since this thread came back to some semblance of life...Title 32. Title 10 is active duty.

The first written reference of the militia in the colonies was in the Legal Code of 1648, the first compiled laws in the colonies. "Forasmuch as the wise and well managing the Militia of this Common-wealth is a matter of great concernment, therefore that it may be carried an end with the utmost safety and certaintie for the best benefit of the Countrie, it is ordered by this Court and the Authoritie thereof: That henceforth there shall be one Sergeant Major of everie Regiment chosen by the trained soldiers of everie Town in each Shire, not only Freemen, but all others that have taken, or shall take the Oath of fidelitie...."(sic).

The management and authority to operate the militia covers from pages 39-43 of the code and talks about the civil duties of each able bodied person, the weapons to be used, the procurement of weapons, election of officers...etc. Typed from my copy of the "Laws & Liberties of Massachusetts".