Posted on 02/10/2011 3:47:02 AM PST by marktwain
Will he get fined for not "...providing himself with a good musket..."?
/s
>>...every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock...
>
>Hey, wait; it is unconstitutional to require a citizen to buy something, isn’t it (health insurance fiasco)?
Two problems with likening the two:
1 — ObamaCare has been attempted to be justified only by the Interstate Commerce clause and demands the purchase of insurance which, ironically, is prohibited from being sold across state lines by federal law; whereas the Constitution specifically mentions arming the militia.
2 — The phrase “provide himself with” means that he could, if sufficiently skilled, manufacture the required items himself.
Or, obtain one from an ambushed, dead Redcoat?
;^)
Considering that Act was passed by the Second Congress, I don’t think that would be valid:
1 — There would be a lack of redcoats, and
2 — As no state of war existed at the time then, unless the obtaining were done in a case of self-defense, it would be theft or murder to do so.
(Shamelessly borrowing from the US Army) I am a militia of one!
Not at all. Every state has the right to raise one, or organize one.
Militia is a word that is both singular and plural with no change in spelling or pronunciation, like deer, moose, or aircraft. The use of an "s" to pluralize it is a product of ignorant journalists edjumicaytid in bublik skewlz.
By saying "The militia of the SEVERAL states" it is obvious that there is more than one militia and state involved, since each state has its own. Otherwise, it would read "*A* militia of (or from) the several..."
Good try, though.
I was steering towards the original thinking that every male, 17 - 45 yo, was "militia"... the only question was whether he had purchased his good musket or flintlock, or for some reason was putting it off for awhile.
You mean “hated”...
One of the untold stories about the Schindler Jews was the fact that even when they were working for the Nazi’s, they were armed...
At least that is what I recall hearing about them...
And a little snippet out of “Unintended Consequences”...The Jews did some remarkable things against an armed force by little stings on the beast until they had a sizable force to deal with, and the Germans had a hard time quelling that little insurrection...
Seems to me right now that the Jewish state is quite capable of defending itself from most antagonists these days...
But that is just what I see...
Many of them (gun grabbers) then go on to say that today's militia is the National Guard,
Wrong answer Gun Grabbers.
When the National Guard was established by Congress. It was written into 'the Act', that the NG does NOT replace the 'Militia' mentioned in the 2A.
And this was long before any 'DoD' existed, or ties into that lawsuit mentioned in the article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.