What is the meaning of "militia" in the second amendment?

[robertacollier]

I think it was fairly straightforward for the founders.

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

• Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
  --Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

• Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."
  --Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

 

[daws101]

I think it was fairly straightforward for the founders.

• "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
  — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

• Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
  --Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

• 
  
  
  • Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."
    --Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

You have got to be joking.

 

[JakeStarkey]

OP confuses organized militia from unorganized militia, a doctrine that would develop over time.

OP is living in 1788.

 

[007]

OP confuses organized militia from unorganized militia, a doctrine that would develop over time.

OP is living in 1788.

A few phone calls to a few of my friends and I've just organized a militia.

That good enough for you knee jerk, constitution hating, leftist reactionists?

 

[JakeStarkey]

An unorganized militia, as you well know, 007, that the governor can call into the organized militia whenever he sees it necessary.

 

[robertacollier]

OP confuses organized militia from unorganized militia, a doctrine that would develop over time.

OP is living in 1788.

They are talking about every person, organized or informal. Lee, in fact, makes the comment about training for young people. He also clarifies that militia members need not take up arms on every occasion. Both organization and informality existed at that time.

Also, the idea of defending oneself and bearing arms does not change over time.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"They are talking about every person, organized or informal" is a false statement, because the concept did not exist then. But you can try to prove it from the pertinent documents.

 

[Dan Daly]

"the militia" as referenced in the 2nd Amendment refers to the militias of the States, which were pretty much made up of all able-bodied males. Since the advent of the national guard, some states still have their constitutional militias, while the US Code defines the national militia...which consists of the national guard and states militias (organized militia) and again, pretty much every able bodied male of fighting age (unorganized militia).

In the context of your right to keep and bear arms under the 2nd Amendment, it is mentioned only as the reason why "the people" have the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[robertacollier]

Lee could not have been more clear:

• "The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."

The type of obfuscation we see today (and on this thread) is exactly the warning to which Lee refers.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your statement is an anti-republican one, and we live in a republican country. Be mindful.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"the militia" is simple. It's what's written in Article 1 Section 8.

The militia is merely an organisation that can be called up into federal service, has officers appointed by the state etc.

It is not just people who choose to get together armed. That would be dangerous and the Supreme Court has ruled this is not the case anyway.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A militia is always subject to organization by the state.

 

[waltky]

What is the meaning of "militia" in the second amendment?

A state version of the Nat'l. Guard....

... historically the states didn't have, at that time, a national army like we do now...

... so militias were established by the states to do what a federal army would normally be responsible for protecting their territory.

 

[Anathema]

OP is living in 1788.

As we all should be, when it comes to the Bill of Rights.

 

[DarkFury]

"the militia" as referenced in the 2nd Amendment refers to the militias of the States, which were pretty much made up of all able-bodied males. Since the advent of the national guard, some states still have their constitutional militias, while the US Code defines the national militia...which consists of the national guard and states militias (organized militia) and again, pretty much every able bodied male of fighting age (unorganized militia).

In the context of your right to keep and bear arms under the 2nd Amendment, it is mentioned only as the reason why "the people" have the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

OP confuses organized militia from unorganized militia, a doctrine that would develop over time.

OP is living in 1788.

You are living in Whoville.

 

[frigidweirdo]

OP is living in 1788.

As we all should be, when it comes to the Bill of Rights.

Why? Because the Bill of Rights didn't exist in 1788?????? Seems like the Kim Davis view of the Bill of Rights.

 

[robertacollier]

"the militia" is simple. It's what's written in Article 1 Section 8.

The militia is merely an organisation that can be called up into federal service, has officers appointed by the state etc.

It is not just people who choose to get together armed. That would be dangerous and the Supreme Court has ruled this is not the case anyway.

Your militia that is "merely an organization" is the very essence of "people who choose to get together armed."

 

[frigidweirdo]

"the militia" is simple. It's what's written in Article 1 Section 8.

The militia is merely an organisation that can be called up into federal service, has officers appointed by the state etc.

It is not just people who choose to get together armed. That would be dangerous and the Supreme Court has ruled this is not the case anyway.

Your militia that is "merely an organization" is the very essence of "people who choose to get together armed."

You have to remember that the militia is there to PROTECT the constitution.

Both from outside invaders and from the government.
In order to do this it needs to be organised.

What the founders didn't want were armed groups of people who would be a threat to the legitimate government and constitution. But they wanted an organised group that could take down an illegitimate government.

The balance is difficult. So they made "the militia" with the states having the power to appoint officers. The states couldn't have armies. But they had their militia, that could be called up to federal service when needed.

All this was designed to be the balance.

Having unorganised militias is not part of this plan. The "unorganised militia" at present is merely a manner to stop people demanding the right to be in the National Guard. The "unorganised militia" doesn't have state appointed leadership, so it can't actually do anything though.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"the militia" is simple. It's what's written in Article 1 Section 8.

The militia is merely an organisation that can be called up into federal service, has officers appointed by the state etc.

It is not just people who choose to get together armed. That would be dangerous and the Supreme Court has ruled this is not the case anyway.

Your militia that is "merely an organization" is the very essence of "people who choose to get together armed."

You have to remember that the militia is there to PROTECT the constitution.

Both from outside invaders and from the government.
In order to do this it needs to be organised.

What the founders didn't want were armed groups of people who would be a threat to the legitimate government and constitution. But they wanted an organised group that could take down an illegitimate government.

The balance is difficult. So they made "the militia" with the states having the power to appoint officers. The states couldn't have armies. But they had their militia, that could be called up to federal service when needed.

All this was designed to be the balance.

Having unorganised militias is not part of this plan. The "unorganised militia" at present is merely a manner to stop people demanding the right to be in the National Guard. The "unorganised militia" doesn't have state appointed leadership, so it can't actually do anything though.

The National Guard is a facet of the standing army, subject to federal control. It has nothing to do with the militia.