Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Technogeeb
"There is no such thing as a "state militia"

I see. Then what was the Virginia Militia? The Maine Militia? The Vermont Militia?

"A "state militia" would only be that portion of the militia present in a given state"

Ah. And the other portion?

"As far as the 2nd amendment goes, it does not secure the right for the "militia" in any case, it secures it for the people."

Correct. The people in the well regulated, state Militia. It did not secure that right for every person. Or do you think it did?

Congress has the constitutional power to organize the militia of each state. They did so in the Militia Act of 1792. The second amendment protects the RKBA of those individuals as part of their state Militia.

Try rebutting that with facts instead of name-calling. If you can.

350 posted on 11/06/2007 10:48:04 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen

The Constitution grants Congress the power to organize “the militia”. It does not say “the militias of the various states”, it does not say “state militias”, it simply says “the militia” and does so in the context of the whole of the USA.

Likewise the 2nd Amendment - which refers to the “militia”, not “state militia”.

Stop moving words around, and adding them to where they aren’t.


351 posted on 11/07/2007 11:02:36 AM PST by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies ]

To: robertpaulsen
I see. Then what was the Virginia Militia? The Maine Militia? The Vermont Militia?

That portion of the militia which happened to reside within that State.

Ah. And the other portion?

Outside the various States, there would be that portion which might reside in territories, the federal district, or any other area under the authority of the new Republic.

Correct. The people in the well regulated, state Militia.

Once again, this shows you have no clue what the word militia even means. It also shows that you lack the ability to comprehend even the most basic of English sentences. The right is secured for the people, not "the militia". The "militia" is a collective, and collectives do not have rights, only individuals.

It did not secure that right for every person

Certainly if the founders had wanted to do so, they could have used language like "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Oh wait; they did. Are you an idiot who can't understand simple English, or just a liar who hates basic freedoms?

Congress has the constitutional power to organize the militia of each state

Wrong. The Constitution grants the power "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia". Not "militias", but singular "Militia".

Try rebutting that with facts instead of name-calling. If you can

That's difficult to do when an accurate assessment of the facts would involve calling you far worse names than would be allowed on this board.

355 posted on 11/10/2007 4:51:47 PM PST by Technogeeb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson