Jump to content
Roger Alicea

The Militia is Missing Opportunities

Recommended Posts

I am not an expert on anything.  I am simply a civilian automation technician who is an Army combat vet deeply committed to the Constitution.  I respect the Militia and what its intent is, but I also see the Militia struggling to maintain credibility and relevance especially against the anti-2A political winds that are ripping states like Virginia to shreds and doing everything possible to malign the Miltia.  I'll try to make this post short and let the discussion fill the gaps.

First, let's define the Militia.  The Constitution is rather vague on what exactly the Militia is, but it clearly treats the Militia as separate from the Army and Navy (and Air Force) (Article II, Section 2.1).  The President is charged with calling forth the Militia in times of need, but there is no explicit requirement that the Militia must serve that calling (Article II, Section 2.1).  Part of the reason that the Militia can't be required to serve is that the Militia is not an organization of anything; it is a condition of U.S. citizenship (10 USC, 246), which is why the Constitution does not define the Militia.  As such, no individual can be compelled to serve the government (Selective Service [the Draft] notwithstanding, but more on that later).  The Militia is first-and-foremost the security force of the individual, then to his family, then to his community, then to his city, and on to his state where he/she can join the National Guard if so inclined.  The federal government is dead last in the hierarchy of priorities for the Militia.

Per the U.S. Constitution, Congress is charged with arming and disciplining the Militia.  Where the Constitution refers to "regulated", it simply means to "maintain" a minimum level of preparedness (Amendment II).  The bare minimum of this requirement is fulfilled in the First and Second Amendments: Congress must protect our freedom of association (to organize and train each other) and right to bear arms.  We see every day how this is being challenged and there are all manner of reasons for it.  This discussion is not about the merits of those reasons, but about what the Militia can do to represent the best reasons to fight anti-2A activism.

Here are the opportunities I see us missing:
 

1. Push Congress to expand the definition of Militia under 10 USC, 246.  The Militia should be something along the lines of "every citizen of the United States" and not limited by physical ability, gender, or age as it is currently.  Advocating for expansion of the definition will show that the entire country should be invested in the Militia; not just "able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in Section 313 of Title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard."  Such an action will further strengthen our standing as the largest independent civilian military in the world.  There is a major political battle with this that we must be aware of.  I'm not certain, but I strongly suspect that 10 USC 246 is the underlying criteria for Selective Service.  Expanding the definition will be argued to affect who qualifies for Selective Service.  The counter-argument MUST be that it doesn't matter how the Militia is defined because the Militia is not an entity of the federal government, so the definition should have no bearing on the requirements of Selective Service.  That false association has been part of what has soured public perception of the Militia as a useless, outdated novelty.

2. Develop a national pact among the organized Militias that addresses minimum firearm training standards.  We should be THE entity that people look to for firearms training standards- not the NRA or any other lobbying organization.  This is not a criticism of lobbying organizations, but simply a call for the Militia to take charge of matters that fall under its intent.  Our trainers can certainly be NRA or USCCA certified, but the training must be under the umbrella of the minimum standards agreed upon by the organized Militias.

 

3. Become more visible in community engagement.  Adopt a highway, commit to cleaning a park, food drives, etc. all show that the Militia is an extension of the community and not just some "conspiracy kooks" playing with firearms in the woods.

So, that's it: update the definition of the Militia, take control of civilian firearms training standards, and get more involved in the community.  We must become relevant in the eyes of the general public, not just with each other.  Strength lies in unity, so the more people we have who respect and support us the more successful the Militia will be.

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

 

 

 

 

Edited by Roger Alicea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great statement #2 should not be restricted to just firearms there are also National Militia Standards (NMS) that should be considered. This would further allow interoperability between the various groups. # 3 Groups should always seek to interact in a positive appearance with your local municipality, county, state and regional. Take the approach of how can we further assist them in times of need and/or emergency. Look at training like: C.E.R.T. (Community Emergency Response Team), ARRL local club (assist in re-establishing communications in emergencies), Sky Warn group establishment (NWS spotters group) As group you should be able offer skills and abilities in times of need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Author of the topic Posted
4 hours ago, Ranger0320 said:

Great statement #2 should not be restricted to just firearms there are also National Militia Standards (NMS) that should be considered. This would further allow interoperability between the various groups. # 3 Groups should always seek to interact in a positive appearance with your local municipality, county, state and regional. Take the approach of how can we further assist them in times of need and/or emergency. Look at training like: C.E.R.T. (Community Emergency Response Team), ARRL local club (assist in re-establishing communications in emergencies), Sky Warn group establishment (NWS spotters group) As group you should be able offer skills and abilities in times of need.

I agree about #2 so long as it is a freely engaged agreement between the organized militias.   This means that we have to accept that there may develop various agreements until such time as there may be a single standard that all units can agree upon.  In other words, participation should not be a requirement to be recognized as an organized militia.  Let the credibility of participation guide how each unit adopts the standards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 1:14 PM, Roger Alicea said:

I am not an expert on anything.  I am simply a civilian automation technician who is an Army combat vet deeply committed to the Constitution.  I respect the Militia and what its intent is, but I also see the Militia struggling to maintain credibility and relevance especially against the anti-2A political winds that are ripping states like Virginia to shreds and doing everything possible to malign the Miltia.  I'll try to make this post short and let the discussion fill the gaps.

First, let's define the Militia.  The Constitution is rather vague on what exactly the Militia is, but it clearly treats the Militia as separate from the Army and Navy (and Air Force) (Article II, Section 2.1).  The President is charged with calling forth the Militia in times of need, but there is no explicit requirement that the Militia must serve that calling (Article II, Section 2.1).  Part of the reason that the Militia can't be required to serve is that the Militia is not an organization of anything; it is a condition of U.S. citizenship (10 USC, 246), which is why the Constitution does not define the Militia.  As such, no individual can be compelled to serve the government (Selective Service [the Draft] notwithstanding, but more on that later).  The Militia is first-and-foremost the security force of the individual, then to his family, then to his community, then to his city, and on to his state where he/she can join the National Guard if so inclined.  The federal government is dead last in the hierarchy of priorities for the Militia.

Per the U.S. Constitution, Congress is charged with arming and disciplining the Militia.  Where the Constitution refers to "regulated", it simply means to "maintain" a minimum level of preparedness (Amendment II).  The bare minimum of this requirement is fulfilled in the First and Second Amendments: Congress must protect our freedom of association (to organize and train each other) and right to bear arms.  We see every day how this is being challenged and there are all manner of reasons for it.  This discussion is not about the merits of those reasons, but about what the Militia can do to represent the best reasons to fight anti-2A activism.

Here are the opportunities I see us missing:
 

1. Push Congress to expand the definition of Militia under 10 USC, 246.  The Militia should be something along the lines of "every citizen of the United States" and not limited by physical ability, gender, or age as it is currently.  Advocating for expansion of the definition will show that the entire country should be invested in the Militia; not just "able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in Section 313 of Title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard."  Such an action will further strengthen our standing as the largest independent civilian military in the world.  There is a major political battle with this that we must be aware of.  I'm not certain, but I strongly suspect that 10 USC 246 is the underlying criteria for Selective Service.  Expanding the definition will be argued to affect who qualifies for Selective Service.  The counter-argument MUST be that it doesn't matter how the Militia is defined because the Militia is not an entity of the federal government, so the definition should have no bearing on the requirements of Selective Service.  That false association has been part of what has soured public perception of the Militia as a useless, outdated novelty.

2. Develop a national pact among the organized Militias that addresses minimum firearm training standards.  We should be THE entity that people look to for firearms training standards- not the NRA or any other lobbying organization.  This is not a criticism of lobbying organizations, but simply a call for the Militia to take charge of matters that fall under its intent.  Our trainers can certainly be NRA or USCCA certified, but the training must be under the umbrella of the minimum standards agreed upon by the organized Militias.

 

3. Become more visible in community engagement.  Adopt a highway, commit to cleaning a park, food drives, etc. all show that the Militia is an extension of the community and not just some "conspiracy kooks" playing with firearms in the woods.

So, that's it: update the definition of the Militia, take control of civilian firearms training standards, and get more involved in the community.  We must become relevant in the eyes of the general public, not just with each other.  Strength lies in unity, so the more people we have who respect and support us the more successful the Militia will be.

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

 

 

 

 

Hi,  I'm just the FNG and am late to the conversation, but this thread was one of the real reasons I wanted to sign on here and discuss the topic.  This is just my opinion and that along with a couple of bucks will buy you a cup of coffee in most restaurants in America.  Keep that in mind.

 

IMO, we do not need Congress to expand the militia statutes.  There is a two-fold reason:

 

Civil rights legislation did away with age discrimination, so the militia cannot discriminate based on age

The Heller decision of 2008 ruled that individuals have a Right to keep and bear Arms for individual self defense

 

Alexander Hamilton began to realize the near impossibility of getting the militia to muster a mere two times a year so I think that is what compelled him to say:

 

"Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year"  (Federalist Papers)

 

In all reality we cannot assemble the people to muster, so we must do what we can to make sure that society is properly armed.    I defer to Patrick Henry on this:

 

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.: -Patrick Henry.

 

The people are the militia.  We are the unorganized militia, not the organized militia.  That does not mean that we should be disorganized.  If we seek our validation and existence on the basis of statutes, we remain under the control of the government.  Unfortunately, there are at least two separate governments in the United States:

 

1)  The de jure, lawful, constitutional Republic as envisioned by the founders and framers and

2)  The de facto, unlawful, illegal, and  unconstitutional government emanating out of Washington Wonderland, District of Corruption

 

The challenge before us is to retain Liberty and enforce the guarantee of those Rights that pre-existed before the government was formed and avoid becoming subject to an illegal government that would outlaw your weapons and jail anyone that opposes an outlaw government that has perverted the Constitution.  A man cannot serve two masters.  How we approach this dilemma requires a lot of discussion and thought.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. If we get ahead of Congress with the definition of "militia", we could also ensure that the future generations have something to fall back on. Switzerland requires that teens that are of I believe, age 18, train in the military for one year. That way they are prepared and also own guns in their homes. If I were a teen again, I would have loved to do one year in the military. One year is not that long. As an adult, I feel very lacking in self-defense and even thinking about owning a gun had not crossed my mind until about 4 years ago. Then as an adult, you may have to apply for cards and undergo training to even purchase a firearm. (I live in ILLINOIS). We need a FOID card to even purchase a firearm. Then to carry, we need to take training and get a Conceal carry permit.  Some teens may not like it, but it would ensure that they have self preservation and a way of defending themselves. It may keep them out of gangs and trouble, and teach them organization and what it means to take an oath and have someone else depending on you and vice-versa.

 

 

Here is an except from an article on the internet on Switzerland and guns.Apparently, they are trying to change the laws as well:

 

Hermann Suter, vice-president of the Swiss lobbying group Pro Tell:

"It is a question of trust between the state and the citizen. The citizen is not just a citizen, he is also a soldier, " he reminds me. "The gun at home is the best way to avoid dictatorships - only dictators take arms away from the citizens." 

 

The army is not the only entity to have a tradition with guns however. About 600,000 Swiss - many of them children - belong to shooting clubs.

On the second weekend in September each year, about 4,000 Zurich girls and boys, aged 12 to 16, take part in Knabenschiessen, a rifle marksmanship contest. The winner is honoured with the title King of the Marksmen.

"Never point your gun anywhere but the target or the ceiling," instructor Michael Merki warns me as he gives me my first air rifle lesson at a Zurich shooting range. "Safety must come first." He steadies my hand.

Shooting instructors at rifle clubs always control who is shooting," he says. And all ammunition bought at the club has to be used there. 

"When the shooting is finished and the person wants to leave the club, the instructor will look to see how many bullets have been shot and will demand the rest are given back."

I'm always amazed how the National Rifle Association points to Switzerland - they make it sound as if it was part of southern Texas! Prof Martin Killias, Zurich University

He loads my rifle and, reluctantly, I shoot twice at the target - the first shots I've ever fired in my life.

When I see I've scored highly with a very accurate shot, I feel an electric frisson of excitement go through my body. I wonder how children manage that sense of thrill, and suggest that perhaps gun clubs glorify weapons and encourage an unhealthy fascination with guns?

A murmur of protest is heard around the rifle club.

"It teaches people to respect guns," Michael tells me. "A lot of hyperactive children come to rifle club. They learn to stand still, to concentrate for much longer, and it helps them get better results in school, and in life." 

Swiss citizens - for example hunters, or those who shoot as a sport - can get a permit to buy guns and ammunition, unless they have a criminal record, or police deem them unsuitable on psychiatric or security grounds. But hunters and sportsmen are greatly outnumbered by those keeping army guns - which again illustrates the difference between Switzerland and the US.

"We have guns at home, but they are kept for peaceful purposes. There is no point taking the gun out of your home in Switzerland because it is illegal to carry a gun in the street. To shoot someone who just looks at you in a funny way - this is not Swiss culture!"

Street violence has gone up in recent years in Switzerland but there hasn't been an increase in gun-related incidents.

 

I feel like this could work if properly executed. Maybe make it "military-like" for the USA.

 

This could work in the USA. I feel that most of our teens are responsible enough to take it on. The military would definitely straighten out some that needed it. In my father's generation, it was very common to send a teen to military school to teach them and help them to grow into a responsible young man part of something larger than themselves. President Trump attended Military School.  I have a coworker that was going down the wrong path in his teen years and a judge sent him to the Navy for four years. It straightened him out and paid for his college. He works along side me in a hospital and is an excellent employee. He tells me all of the time that he was grateful to that judge for sending him in. It changed the trajectory of his life. It would be some way to introduce our youth to responsibility. They would have to put down the I-phones and I-Pads and actually hold something that would teach them respect,diligence and responsibility. It would also un-teach them the untruth's that the universities are teaching them about capitalism and socialism. They would see that in the real world, self-preservation is the way to go. Not depending on the government (they would see first hand how the govt really works with the military)  or other people is the way to be and actually being supportive for your fellow man is the way to fulfillment and happiness. A true lesson in life with no bull ...! Also, instead of giving our young people medicine for ADD, maybe a dose of reality would be longer lasting and beneficial to their well-being. Not being dependent on medication for their lives, that they probably do not need.

 

The only question in my mind is what happens when Congress is not acting in the preferences of the people? Do we really want them to be in charge of changing our Constitution? What happens when they feel comfortable enough to start changing other things in the Constitution, in their favor and not ours? We would have to wait until there is a majority in the House and Senate. Who knows when that will be?

I was listening to a professor in one of the Ivy League schools (he is a patriot) on You Tube recently and he was speaking about how the Stanford law school students were about to introduce a way to circumvent the Constitution with a certain bill. The professor was horrified and saying that this bill would pave the way for Congress to run away with the Government and do whatever they wanted without oversight and approval. I wish I could remember the name of the professor. I think that he may have been part of the John Birch Society. Anyway, here is a video from the John Birch         Society.https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk  This is a great video.

 

https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk

https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KCS said:

I totally agree. If we get ahead of Congress with the definition of "militia", we could also ensure that the future generations have something to fall back on. Switzerland requires that teens that are of I believe, age 18, train in the military for one year. That way they are prepared and also own guns in their homes. If I were a teen again, I would have loved to do one year in the military. One year is not that long. As an adult, I feel very lacking in self-defense and even thinking about owning a gun had not crossed my mind until about 4 years ago. Then as an adult, you may have to apply for cards and undergo training to even purchase a firearm. (I live in ILLINOIS). We need a FOID card to even purchase a firearm. Then to carry, we need to take training and get a Conceal carry permit.  Some teens may not like it, but it would ensure that they have self preservation and a way of defending themselves. It may keep them out of gangs and trouble, and teach them organization and what it means to take an oath and have someone else depending on you and vice-versa.

 

 

Here is an except from an article on the internet on Switzerland and guns.Apparently, they are trying to change the laws as well:

 

Hermann Suter, vice-president of the Swiss lobbying group Pro Tell:

"It is a question of trust between the state and the citizen. The citizen is not just a citizen, he is also a soldier, " he reminds me. "The gun at home is the best way to avoid dictatorships - only dictators take arms away from the citizens." 

 

The army is not the only entity to have a tradition with guns however. About 600,000 Swiss - many of them children - belong to shooting clubs.

On the second weekend in September each year, about 4,000 Zurich girls and boys, aged 12 to 16, take part in Knabenschiessen, a rifle marksmanship contest. The winner is honoured with the title King of the Marksmen.

"Never point your gun anywhere but the target or the ceiling," instructor Michael Merki warns me as he gives me my first air rifle lesson at a Zurich shooting range. "Safety must come first." He steadies my hand.

Shooting instructors at rifle clubs always control who is shooting," he says. And all ammunition bought at the club has to be used there. 

"When the shooting is finished and the person wants to leave the club, the instructor will look to see how many bullets have been shot and will demand the rest are given back."

I'm always amazed how the National Rifle Association points to Switzerland - they make it sound as if it was part of southern Texas! Prof Martin Killias, Zurich University

He loads my rifle and, reluctantly, I shoot twice at the target - the first shots I've ever fired in my life.

When I see I've scored highly with a very accurate shot, I feel an electric frisson of excitement go through my body. I wonder how children manage that sense of thrill, and suggest that perhaps gun clubs glorify weapons and encourage an unhealthy fascination with guns?

A murmur of protest is heard around the rifle club.

"It teaches people to respect guns," Michael tells me. "A lot of hyperactive children come to rifle club. They learn to stand still, to concentrate for much longer, and it helps them get better results in school, and in life." 

Swiss citizens - for example hunters, or those who shoot as a sport - can get a permit to buy guns and ammunition, unless they have a criminal record, or police deem them unsuitable on psychiatric or security grounds. But hunters and sportsmen are greatly outnumbered by those keeping army guns - which again illustrates the difference between Switzerland and the US.

"We have guns at home, but they are kept for peaceful purposes. There is no point taking the gun out of your home in Switzerland because it is illegal to carry a gun in the street. To shoot someone who just looks at you in a funny way - this is not Swiss culture!"

Street violence has gone up in recent years in Switzerland but there hasn't been an increase in gun-related incidents.

 

I feel like this could work if properly executed. Maybe make it "military-like" for the USA.

 

This could work in the USA. I feel that most of our teens are responsible enough to take it on. The military would definitely straighten out some that needed it. In my father's generation, it was very common to send a teen to military school to teach them and help them to grow into a responsible young man part of something larger than themselves. President Trump attended Military School.  I have a coworker that was going down the wrong path in his teen years and a judge sent him to the Navy for four years. It straightened him out and paid for his college. He works along side me in a hospital and is an excellent employee. He tells me all of the time that he was grateful to that judge for sending him in. It changed the trajectory of his life. It would be some way to introduce our youth to responsibility. They would have to put down the I-phones and I-Pads and actually hold something that would teach them respect,diligence and responsibility. It would also un-teach them the untruth's that the universities are teaching them about capitalism and socialism. They would see that in the real world, self-preservation is the way to go. Not depending on the government (they would see first hand how the govt really works with the military)  or other people is the way to be and actually being supportive for your fellow man is the way to fulfillment and happiness. A true lesson in life with no bull ...! Also, instead of giving our young people medicine for ADD, maybe a dose of reality would be longer lasting and beneficial to their well-being. Not being dependent on medication for their lives, that they probably do not need.

 

The only question in my mind is what happens when Congress is not acting in the preferences of the people? Do we really want them to be in charge of changing our Constitution? What happens when they feel comfortable enough to start changing other things in the Constitution, in their favor and not ours? We would have to wait until there is a majority in the House and Senate. Who knows when that will be?

I was listening to a professor in one of the Ivy League schools (he is a patriot) on You Tube recently and he was speaking about how the Stanford law school students were about to introduce a way to circumvent the Constitution with a certain bill. The professor was horrified and saying that this bill would pave the way for Congress to run away with the Government and do whatever they wanted without oversight and approval. I wish I could remember the name of the professor. I think that he may have been part of the John Birch Society. Anyway, here is a video from the John Birch         Society.https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk  This is a great video.

 

https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk

https://youtu.be/lecAy-3Qtxk

 

So, you had rather have the government in charge of your Rights and Liberties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No...actually that scares me to death. I said at the very least Congress( The Republicans) would have to have the majority in both the Senate and House, otherwise I think that it would backfire. They would start changing other "constitutional laws" in their favor with no oversight. It would be good for the young people to serve maybe one year. This could probably be done without an actual amendment to the Constitution.  It could be a law without changing The Constitution. (For example...maybe State law??) I live in Illinois, and as far as I am concerned, the gun laws are unconstitutional, but we STILL HAVE THEM IN EFFECT!! FOID card to purchase guns and Conceal Carry Permit to carry outside of your home. I wish that it was not like that, but this state is full of LIBERALS!! Not downstate, but in Chicago and suburbs unfortunately. I think that it would benefit the kids to serve. Hope that clarifies... KCS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very thankful this discussion has been brought up. As it has recently been talked about here a couple weeks back. And i do agree that we should take advantage of the opportunity we have to make a very good impression of what the militia is in spite of what the left has labeled it as.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately you cant get six people to agree on a style of training.   Much less the amount of people who own guns and use them regularly are a very small percentage of the population.   Third Congress doesn't like you owning guns in the first place much less civilians training others.  This isnt thr same country you used to live in a 100 years ago.

 

Socialism is taking over and going to claim victory here in less than a decade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my 2 cents...

 

We have ex-Military in these Militias right? If I were to pick, it would be them. They probably know best. They have been there. Nothing like experience leading the way...Would follow them.

Edited by KCS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...