Replies

I wonder why the ACLU didn't think of asking George Mason, the father of the Bill of Rights, what he meant by "militia?"

"I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."

And if that wasn't clear enough, Mason said

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

It's the same old story, isn't it? The concentration of power in the hands of a few. Power-lusters, spiral-eyed utopians, the haters of mankind acquire control of the apparatus of the state. What follows is slaughter and ruin as the sad history of the twentieth century - and now the tewnty-first - has made so abundantly clear.

Victor Davis Hanson, in his conclusion to The Soul of Battle says,

The great danger of the present age is that democracy may never again marshal the will to march against and ultimately destroy evil...
But an even greater peril still in present-day democratic society is that we may have forgotten that there finally must be a choice between good and evil; that the real immorality is not the use of great force to inflict punishment, but, as the Greeks remind us, the failure to exercise moral authority at all. When men like Epaminondas, Sherman and Patton go to war to stop evil and to save lives, there is soul to their battle that lives on well after they are gone.

I believe that there are still a sufficient number of courageous men and women who will make the critical difference when that Day comes: those who understand the necessity to make a choice and take a stand regardless of the cost, even if that choice costs them their lives. History has taught us dreadful lessons in the consequences of passivity, ignorance and sheepery; I do not care to repeat them. What should be so clear to us is that we will have to go to war; not just against the death-worshippers of eh Middle East, but also agaisnt the liars, haters and death-worshippers amongst our own countrymen. We will have to invoke the soul of battle and fight as circumstance, the morality and logic of freedom and the love of our lives and those dear to us demand that we must.

“A Militias in 1792 consisted of part-time citizen-soldiers organized by individual states. Its members were civilians who kept arms, ammunition and other military equipment in their houses and barns—there was no other way to muster a militia with sufficient speed. Over time, however, the state militias failed to develop as originally anticipated.”

OK, this guy is nitwit. A result of the public school system.

Where is his proof that the state’s controlled the militia??? It was, in fact, the militias who were not considered professional soldiers of any state possession. Militias were always private citizens who came when called, not those who were organized by the state governments.

Where is his proof that speed of muster was the reason for private storage of arms? The fact is that the people, private citizens, owned their own arms and the state had no say or control, as they do today.

Where is this nitwit’s proof that the militias did not form as anticipated? Specifically, where is his proof that there was any anticipation of formation at all? I have never read a word of expectation by any government official as to the desired composition of militias?