Category: Militia

A Subject Matter Expert

“After reading about the history of the second amend and talking with a lot of hist & law professors- I believe the second amendment has been intentionally misinterpreted. It was never meant as an individual right it was created to protect state militias like the national guard.” [More]

What did he read and who did he talk to?

Is there anything more endearing than ignorance presented with arrogance? Now that he’s achieved Constitutional godhead, maybe he can produce the evidence ACLU failed to back before he was born…?

[Via Michael G]

How Can You Tell John Idleburg is Lying?

While I am a believer in our Constitution and our 2nd Amendment, I firmly support the ban on assault-style rifles and I truly hope our federal government follows to ban them nationwide. Since our Constitution and the 2nd Amendment were formed, firearms have become much more sophisticated and much more deadly. Our Founding Fathers were not loading .223 rounds into their muskets. They were not using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies. As I said following the Highland Park mass shooting, these weapons of war do not belong on our streets. They’re used to kill our police, used to kill innocent people, and used to inflict maximum carnage on their victims. [More]

The hand on the Bible is always a good clue.

Some of the cud-chewers in “Comments” certainly have the government they deserve.

UPDATE:

Never mind that this is illegal under current federal law. But who cares, right? [More]

[Via President Non_Fudd]

A Good First Step

Governor DeWine Signs BFA-Backed SB 185 to Protect Second Amendment Rights During Emergencies [More]

First, do no harm. Excellent.

Now, assuming we’re talking about a widespread disaster where limited civil authority resources are triaged and whole areas will be left for an indeterminate time to fend for themselves, dare we hope we’ll ever see a bill that provides for activating the militia of the whole people after training and equipping them first?

Muster Call

A federal lawsuit supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition has been filed in New York, challenging that state’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” [More]

I’ve been arguing not to forget “core purpose” in 2A actions, so I find this a good add:

The firearms at issue in this case are the sorts of bearable arms in common use for lawful purposes that law-abiding people possess at home by the millions. And they are, moreover, exactly what they would bring to service in militia duty, should such be necessary.

Trust Me, He Knows

Who Wants to Tell California AG Bonta that Access to ‘Weapons of War’ as a Check Against Tyranny is a Core Tenet of the Second Amendment? [More]

Why do you think he and his masters are so bent on destroying it?

I just wish more 2A lawsuits would focus more on the Militia, and how ignoring that facilitates more infringements.

Speaking of ‘Every Terrible Implement’…

Large-capacity magazines are not “arms” protected by the Second Amendment because they are not essential to the use of firearms… Additionally, large-capacity magazines are not protected “arms” because they are not commonly used for self-defense. [More]

Since that directly follows an “Overview of Bruen’s text-and-history standard for analyzing Second Amendment claims,” I wonder what Tench would say to that…?

Legal weasel Rob Bonta proves the point that if you limit arguments to “self-defense” and ignore core purpose, you’re not using every means at your disposal.

[Via Jess]

What Happened to Article I, Section 8, Clause 15?

New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Kentucky, and Illinois are deploying several national guard units to the U.S.- Mexico border. [More]

Better than nothing, I guess, but this wouldn’t be needed if the affected states had citizen militias in accordance with the Constitution like they’re supposed to…

[Via bondmen]

Every Terrible Implement

CONNECTICUT CITIZENS DEFENSE LEAGUE AND SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION SUE CT OVER BAN ON MODERN SPORTING ARMS [More]

I dunno– “in Common Use for Lawful Purposes Throughout the United States” seems to exclude everything that’s not, including what will be developed in the future.

As noted:

The Supreme Court, in its infamous Miller decision, nonetheless recognized the function of the Militia, defined as “all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense [and] bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time,” was — and still is — to field citizen soldiers. These citizens bore arms that were suitable for that purpose, “ordinary military equipment” intended to be taken into “common defense” battles. The Militia did not assemble on the green bearing clubs and spears. They came with the intent to match and best a professional military threat. A modern Militia would require citizens to keep and bear exactly what the gun-grabbing politicians are trying to take away from them, what they pejoratively denounce as “weapons of war.”

And as noted:

Second Amendment will be Nullified if ‘Common Use’ is Restricted to ‘Popularity’

Speaking of ‘Every Terrible Implement of the Soldier’…

No longer science & technology projects, high-energy laser weapons are now operational [More]

So when power packs shrink and individual infantry weapons become a reality…?

This is why, understanding core purpose, “in common use at the time” has to be applied not to what is “popular” with sportsmen, but to what is available on conventional battlefields and to enforcement authorities.

Remember when it took a roomful of computers to attain a fraction of the calculating power of your cell phone?  I remember when a prominent mathematician precited a limit to computational capacity based on a point where tubes burn out and need to be replaced.

What I’m using now would have been considered the stuff of mad scientist fiction.

[Via Jess]

WWJD? *

A group of Senate conservatives is calling on President Joe Biden to fight the nation’s violent crime wave by deploying all available resources to American cities across the United States. [More]

If they were true conservatives they’d understand principles of federalism and what the Founders knew to be “necessary to the security of a free State.”

[Via bondmen]

* Jefferson