Bushmaster

[BT]

Does the second admendment directly state the authorising power of militia?

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed


Why no it doesn't. Do you think other amendments might handle the questions of powers not enumerated?

[Plane]

Yes, powers not claimed by the constitution remin with the states and with the people.

I have always assumed that the states would authorise the militia , each its own.
That was the usual system.
But I don't know why it would be unconstitutional to start militas otherwise .

I imagine that once your militia started breaking law RICO would apply.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

[BT]

powers not claimed by the constitution remin with the states and with the people.

If it remains with the people and we have a working definition of who the people are then i would think that they could form informal alliances, as long as, they stay within legalities.

Would the million man march be a militia? or the tea party gathering at the washington monument? Are arms necessary to flex muscle?

or do they simply come into play whenever kindness fails.

[Plane]

We are getting past my depth , but this is interesting.

I think that the second admendment implys that arms are a key right and milita are a right also.
What would a militia without arms be?
Elks, or Moose?

Being "well ordered " and all, I think that a state or municipal sanction is usually a good idea.

In any case it would be important not to fall from a milita into being an organised crime.

[sirs]

No, complete sense.  If one is being given orders by the Government, by definition they can't be defending the populace against that government.  Again, that's the whole idea behind the Bill of Rights. 

The Bill of Rights limited federal government. That being the whole idea behind the Bill of Rights. Resisting an overreaching federal government would be a logical use of a state militia, organized or not.

Your statement was nonsense.

Naaa.....the nonsense is the idea that the militia, as referred to in the 2nd amendment, could be a body of the Government.  Hardly

[BT]

In that case, they're no longer taking their orders from the Government, so local folks, such as sherriffs and the sort can definately be considered part of that 2nd amendment militia

Then I guess you are backing away from your previous position.

[Plane]

Not every town in those days would have a police force .

San Fransisco for example , got quite large and established while relying on a militia to keep the peace.

What exelence we take for granted in police forces is a recent development.

[Xavier_Onassis]

If the militia is necessary for a free state, then the militia has to be affiliated with the state in some manner. Otherwise, it is simply a shooting club at best and a goon squad at worst.

Being as this country has managed to get by without any "organized militia" since the Civil War, I think it is safe to say that it is NOT necessary. If the state has continued to be free, it has not been because of any militia.

This may have been true in 1780. It seems to have been true when the War of 1812 started. Since then, no, not so much. The Civil War was not a bona fide struggle to keep the country free: the South wanted the freedom to keep many people in slavery, and all under the control of a plantation elite. Some of those in the North wanted to free slaves in the South, but the leaders in the North wanted to retain economic control of an important source of raw materials from the South.

[sirs]

In that case, they're no longer taking their orders from the Government, so local folks, such as sherriffs and the sort can definately be considered part of that 2nd amendment militia

Then I guess you are backing away from your previous position.

Not since I made it painfully clear in that post you took the above sentence from, that if they're no longer taking their orders from the Government, they're no longer an arm of the Government     

[Plane]

Would you call a major diffrence between a posse called by a federal Marshal from one called by a sheriff elected by a county?

[sirs]

Government is Government, though I understand the effort to differentiate Fed from State/Local.  I may be persuaded to consider them as potential organizers of a 2nd amendment militia, if my comments weren't being labeled as nonsense

[Plane]

http://cal-militia.com/

http://kalwnews.org/audio/2010/05/10/california-militias-prepare-disaster_356274.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Committee_of_Vigilance

http://www.militarymuseum.org/Chinatown.html

http://www.constitution.org/mil/ca/mil_usca.htm

Google search for militias keeps turning up a lot of Californians.

Is there something special in California causing this?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Is there something special in California causing this?


===========================================
California has more people. More hair stylists, more tanning booths, more nail salons and more militias. New Yprk is too urban and too cold  and too wet much of the year to strut about in camo.

We have a lot of gun nut militias here in FL as well, driving around in jeeps they spray painted in ugly camo as well.

[sirs]

The fact the psuedo assault weapon Bushmaster, with its "high capacity magazine" wasn't used, has got to be burning a few britches.  No wonder the MSM is keeping hush on this