Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
Good point!

It is indeed! Maybe the Founding Fathers didn't spend time writing the 2nd Amendment just to assure a militia could do that which makes a militia a militia!

if they simply meant the people have the right they would have written, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Gosh.

Gosh - THEY DID!

Why did they add all that Militia clutter?

Uh...maybe to make it clear that it's GOOD for the state to have armed citizens, so that a well-regulated militia could be raised on short notice? Ya know, make sure everyone who shows up to fight for the security of their free state would have arms when they arrived, instead of "I'm here ... hey, anyone got a musket I can borrow? no? so what am I supposed to do?" Having armed militia members is kinda a pre-requisiste to organizing them and marching 'em out.

Call me crazy

You're crazy.

but maybe they meant the people,

Ya THINK?

who are part of a well regulated state militia

How about the people before they're actively involved? Ya know, defending the state may need more people (and arms) than the officers planned, and it would be nice to be able to call on anyone - and I mean anyone - to pitch in on short notice (which they can't if they're not armed). Maybe not everyone had to be active participants, but could at least still be armed, familiar therewith, and not completely useless if called up.

I always thought it was a militia that was necesary to the security of a free state, not an armed public.

Here's a really wild notion: they're really pretty much the same thing!

1,015 posted on 11/16/2007 11:57:35 AM PST by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1010 | View Replies ]


To: ctdonath2
"and it would be nice to be able to call on anyone - and I mean anyone - to pitch in on short notice (which they can't if they're not armed)."

I agree, though I think that should be left up to each state. If the state wants their militia members to take their arms home for just such a reason, I have no problem with that.

"Here's a really wild notion: they're really pretty much the same thing!"

Not according to Hamilton in Federalist 29. He thought there was a big difference between "all the militia" and the select militia -- that being the select militia was organized, trained, and disciplined, with officers appointed by the state.

1,018 posted on 11/16/2007 12:07:02 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1015 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2
When Lincoln stated that it was the desire of the Union for "government of the people; by the people; and for the people" to not perish from the earth, did he mean to convey that the government is the populace? Meaning, the people are the government, without whose consent the government would not exist.
1,039 posted on 11/16/2007 7:18:56 PM PST by Thumper1960 (Unleash the Dogs of War as a Minority, or perish as a party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1015 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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