Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
A gang of overaged boys wanting to play weekend warrior and who proclaim themselves the Militia of Washington County, Arkansas, accountable to no one or nothing but their own interpretation of the Constitution, is not a "well regulated" militia, nor a group that I believe CAN be trusted. If they are serious about wanting to protect the people, let them join the legitimate citizen militia, Arkansas National Guard.
|
That the 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1791, allows the states to have a National Guard, created by act of Congress in 1916.
That the National Guard, paid by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a state agency.
The NG is NOT the militia of the 2nd Amendment and 'well-regulated' never meant 'government ruled' until 1903, when the courts started their acts of judicial tyranny and activism in rewriting the constitution.
-....."The right [to bear arms] is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon....If the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need NO PERMISSION or REGULATION of law for the purpose. But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order.".....- Thomas M. Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law, Third Edition [1898].(Mr. Cooley was Dean of the University of Michigan's Law School, Michigan Supreme Court justice, and a nationally recognized scholar).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
Looking at their website, it appears their real goal is simply to challenge federal gun laws. Fine, one of their members challenged and lost. |
The tyranny of the federal gov. who'd of thunk.