Jump to content

Is my view of "what organized/unorganized militias are" accurate?


Recommended Posts

Is my view of "what organized/unorganized militias are" accurate?

 

As a new guy to this website and forum, I wanted to double check myself by making this post to see if I'm correct on what constitutional organized/unorganized militias are:

 

When I hear someone use the term "militia" as a reference to a group of people in the United States, this is what my brain pictures:

 

Organized Militia:

-a group of patriots that train together for the purpose of being prepared to serve their communities in the case of a natural disaster, medical emergency, or in the assistance in resisting an occupying force,

whether that be an invading foreign military force, or a domestic, unconstitutional force.

 

In times of war:

This can apply to either an outside military force invading our country, or our own government turning into a dictatorship. In this context, a militia, whether an organized or unorganized one is more accurately

and more simply defined as "an example of our 2nd amendment in action"

 

In times of peace: 

A constitutional organized militia in times of peace is a group of patriots that train for the above mentioned scenarios, but in times of peace, on top of their training, they 

volunteer to help their fellow civilians in times of natural disasters. You can easily see examples of this when local constitutional organized militias work along side the national guard helping out victims of hurricanes,

tornados, earthquakes, etc. 

 

 

Un-Organized Militia:

In times of war:

-It's a metaphor that describes any american who resists a foreign occupying force BY FORCE and not just protesting, or resists a domestic occupying force in that same manner. Or as I'd like to phrase it, "Another law abiding citizen fixin to go to jail for doing the right thing." An example would be the writtenhouse kid. The group of patriots he was working along side with I would consider an unorganized militia because they were nowhere to be found watching his six when he was forced to use his rifle to defend himself. If I'm wrong please let me know. It's hard to get facts about that story when big tech is censoring any REAL info about that story. 

 

In times of peace: 

-It's a metaphor describing any americans who stand up and do the right thing in the face of tyranny. Would the people who work for the Epoch times and people who work for Info Wars then be considered an example of unorganized militia? They have shown me that you don't always need to use force to effectively resist tyranny. When I say force, I'm talking about using a weapon.

 

I think my perception about militias, organized/unorganized to be wrong because this view leaves me with questions such as:

 

Why is it that Proud Boys are the only form of an organized militia doing anything? Where are all the other organized militias? The only time I've ever seen orgainzed militias show up in the news are clips of them guarding the front of a business or helping survivors of a hurricane. Is my question just the result of the main stream media keeping me from being aware of other organized militias doing what the proud boys have been doing? If so where can I find info on that?

 

thanks in advance for any info you can give me on what information I need to know to "correct" what I currently "Think" constitutional militias are. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your best source is Dr Edwin Vieira, you will want to find his youtube video on Constitutional Militia.

 

Not to muddy the waters, but there isn't a constitutional militia per se as the Founders intended, but fuck it, we have the 4th and 2nd Amendments, so this is where we are at. 10 USC sect 246 is where unorganized militia is codified....but the US Constitution doesn't know anything about that.

 

Call it a militia. Call it a neighborhood watch. Call it a fellowship of barbershop quartets. It's all good.

Edited by MiguelCepeda
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a newcomer to this and a previously more politically moderate person, this is my theory on why the Proud Boys are in the media so much.  
 

They’re a bunch of young guys who’ve come into their adulthood on social media.  They know how to use social media effectively and they have a more cohesive “brand” like wearing the same polo shirts and a clean cut look.  
 

I’m no expert but I think there’s a right way to do social media, like building a brand instead of just posting conspiracy videos or vulgar memes.  Part of the goal should be to appeal to moderates to gain their support and credibility.  So they understand the movement is a force for good instead of as a bunch of guys playing with guns in the woods to get away from their wives.

 

idk just my thoughts, people are superficial and good presentation helps.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would refer you to the Dick Act of 1902, or the Efficiency of Militia Bill "officially" classified the militia into Organized and Unorganized status.  I understand some people do not accept this law as law, but it is commonly accepted as such.

 

The Organized Militia became the National Guard; under state control (Governor) but could be called into federal service.  This was done to ensure that the quality of training and equipment for the state militias, was up to snuff.

 

What's left is what I consider to be the "traditional" militia... all able-bodied men, between 18-45 years old etc.   Keep in mind that these forces were also traditionally under the jurisdiction of the Governor.  Note here please, that today's militia units that don't accept the Governor as their commander, cannot precisely be called militia: customarily defined as a "state sponsored" non-standard/substitute military force, as opposed to the "organized" militia above.

 

That said, some folks use the term militia, to identify any armed, ad hoc group.  That definition, to me at least, could also include the Wild Bunch, Poncho Villa, BLM, Boko Haram etc.  Perhaps I might be too old school, in expecting an armed formation to have a chain of command, and adhere to the prevailing rules of war, like the Geneva Conventions.

 

Just my two cents on the subject.

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...

Important Information

Use of this site is confirmation and acceptance of your understanding of our Terms of Use , Privacy Policy and site Guidelines . We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.