Militias challenge gun laws in Virginia: "It's about shooting tyrants in the face"

CBS News ^ | November 12, 2020 | Grace Baek

[Perseverando]

On a cold winter morning last February, a woman named Samantha assembled her AR-15 semi-automatic rifle in the parking area next to Timbrook Public Library in Campbell County, Virginia. Her husband, Chad, had his AR-15 in hand and commented, "I would trust going into a gun fight right next to my wife. I've seen her shoot."

Samantha was one of a handful of women attending the call for volunteers to join a group calling itself the Campbell County Militia. Along with Chad and Samantha (who asked to have their last name withheld), over 200 people were at the event, most of them carrying arms.

Kurt Feigel, a gun rights activist and militia organizer, told the group, "We are here today to send a clear and collective message to any would-be-tyrants that would attempt to disarm us: We will not comply."

The formation of the Campbell County Militia is part of a larger movement organized by gun rights activists pushing back against gun laws Virginia enacted in 2020. They claim the new regulations, which include a "red flag" law and universal background checks for gun purchases, infringe on their Second Amendment right to bear arms. Virginia lawmakers shelved more controversial proposals that would have banned semi-automatic guns and high capacity magazines. Still, gun rights activists are bracing for a possible future ban.

"We won't comply. We won't give up our guns," said Feigel.

[Perseverando]

[polymuser]

I just put up a framed replica Declaration on the wall, to remind and refresh me daily, and for the family youts to see.

(The small script takes some adjusting to. We’ll see how the younguns do with it...)

[11th_VA]

Lynchburg is home of the 11th VA ... just sayin ...

[Pining_4_TX]

Time for the rest of us to split from the big cities. Let them become self-governing city-states. If they behave, the rest of the country will sell them food.

[teeman8r]

Maryland Eastern Shore Militia: Urban Patriots, Messem Up for short.

Ready to join the fight.

[polymuser]

Air drop boxes of food along with boxes of booze and switchblades.

[Mathews]

Fourth paragraph from the bottom... is that true? Were some of those folks who were at the capital involved with the kidnapping scheme?

[2aProtectsTheRest]

Federalist 46 made it crystal clear why the Second Amendment exists and what it should mean for the people:

“Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.”

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed46.asp

[lizma2]

They make a good point.

>§ 1890. The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers.

Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890--91

[Perseverando]

Fourth paragraph from the bottom... is that true? Were some of those folks who were at the capital involved with the kidnapping scheme?

I don't know, but if CBS said it I'd have to agree it's BS.

[max americana]

“”It’s about shooting tyrants in the face”

Aside from hanging and tar..

[TalBlack]

A few weeks ago one of the leaders in Jefferson CA flat out defied some edict or other and said right out they’ll shoot anyone coming in to do anything about it. Haven’t heard a thing about it since. Sounded like the kind of defiance Leftist might want to do something about...but no...

[ScholarWarrior]

They will, of course, have to pay the tax.

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

It certainly isn’t about hunting turkeys.

[spudville]

I admit I didn’t go to the article. Does it actually have the quote in the headline? If so, blunt but true.

[Bull Snipe]

They were surrendered at Appomattox. Just sayin

[Paal Gulli]

All the hoopla over "the militia" is a complete red herring. For starters, the first 10 Amendments are termed "The Bill of Rights," which is significant because governments have NO rights. Governments have powers, and only its citizens are conferred rights. And the Bill of Rights was written specifically to LIMIT the powers of government, and to enumerate what Jefferson referred to as "inalienable rights" of the citizenry. To argue that 2A alone among the first 10 Amendments grants further powers to the government -- specifically to create and/or maintain and/or "regulate" a militia (as some subset of a national guard) -- is sheer sophistry.

Also, several of the Founding Fathers, and in particular Jefferson and Mason, were master grammarians. Mason took pains to only make mention of "the militia" in what he would have called a "nominative absolute clause," as defined by Rule #15 in Noah Webster's Rudiments of English Grammar, a treatise Mason would have been intimately familiar with. Excerpted verbatim:

A nominative case or word, joined with a participle, often stands independently of the sentence. This is called, the case absolute.

Examples. The sun being risen, it will be warm. They all consenting, the vote was passed. "Jesus conveyed himself away, a multitude being in that place."

Explanation. The words in italics are not connected with the other part of the sentence, either by agreement or government; they are therefore in the case absolute, which, in English, is always the nominative. (emphasis added)

"... Not connected ... either by agreement or government...." Which means that a nominative absolute clause, according to the "Father of American Scholarship and Education," does not can not control (or even influence) the meaning (or the grammar) of the operative clause. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This grammatical distinction was noted by Chief Justice Scalia in is writing for the majority in the Heller decision and also was expounded upon in an Amicus Brief submitted to SCOTUS on behalf of the Second Amendment Foundation by Dr. Nelson Lund, Ph.D., J.D., who wrote,

The most significant grammatical feature of the Second Amendment is that its preamble is an absolute phrase, often called an ablative absolute or nominative absolute. Such constructions are grammatically independent of the rest of the sentence, and do not qualify any word in the operative clause to which they are appended. The usual function of absolute constructions is to convey some information about the circumstances surrounding the statement in the main clause.

This idea has been reworded by fellow Internet denizen Bruce Tiemann into language that might be more digestible to Joe Sixpack:

A well-crafted pepperoni pizza, being necessary to the preservation of a diverse menu, the right of the people to keep and cook tomatoes, shall not be infringed.

I would ask you to try to argue that this statement says that only pepperoni pizzas can keep and cook tomatoes, and only well-crafted ones at that. This is basically what the so-called states rights people argue with respect to the well-regulated militia, vs. the right to keep and bear arms.

The role of "the militia" is completely irrelevant to the meaning of the 2nd Amendment and as such we should refuse to engage with the anti-gunners on the point. When the hoplophobes raise the point, just tell them to pick up a period-correct copy of Webster's Rudiments of English Grammar and read it, then come back to continue the discussion once they've learned proper English.

[gundog]

Probably where they met their FBI handlers.

[Mathews]

If you’re wondering who the FBI Agent/Informant is in your militia group... It’s everyone but you.