The Second Amendment refers to the armed, unorganized body of the people - a militia in plain usage meaning any one who can take up arms.
Article 1 Section 8 refers to the organized militia one created by Congress. Today called in the states the National Guard but which can be called forth by the federal government.
They are two different forms of militia. The Second Amendment would be redundant if the Founders had meant to set up only a state-organized militia.
Ask a liberal and hoplophobe to explain why two different kinds of militia are referenced in the Constitution.
Agreed. Even the modern version of the Militia Act includes two such classifications of ‘militia’.
But you’re absolutely correct. This liberal nitwit does not realize that the original Constitution already included the provisions he argues the 2nd was about, and therefore, his argument is redundant and irrelevant. 2A could only have been a protection of individual rights when placed in the context of the entire Constitution.
And I’d also like to see him explain the 1st set of militia acts, which required the members to supply their own weapons and ammunition.
Granting letters of marque and reprisal granted civilians military powers. Most commonly that was done to allow privately owned ships to act as privateers to make war at sea. This came with the presumption that those private ships were already armed with the 18th Century's weapon of mass destruction: the cannon. The founders anticipated an armed populous even before the second amendment, and armed with more than just muskets.