MILITIAS - The CONSTITUTIONAL means of dealing with government tyranny and over reach

[Concerned American]

Easy - Militias have no place in the modern world.

What you are saying then....is that the people should have no recourse to government tyranny.

I could understand a Chinese person saying this.

What we are saying is that your recourse is a nonviolent one. Elections.

Half or more of the nation believes the election was fraudulent

As such, militias are gaining membership and strength rapidly.

This is a lie.

A majority of American believe the 2020 election was legitimate.

Poll Results | Quinnipiac University Poll

Quinnipiac University Poll’s list of recent and past poll results for political races, state and national elections, and issues of public concern.

poll.qu.edu

Its a poll dumbass--you should have learned about those in 2016. There are so many ways that polls can be twisted that you can't trust anything ANY of them say. They like the media that reports them have an agenda and they will manipulate the poll until it says exactly what they want it to say. Try a little critical thinking for yourself, moron.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Militias need to become much larger and better organized.

The Constitution clearly expresses this. Clearly the intent of Militias was to keep government in check as a last resort.

If you are not yet a member of a militia, and you love America and freedom, I think now is the time.

Wrong.

This is a lie.

The Constitution expresses no such thing.

And again: there is nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes insurrectionist dogma, nothing that authorizes citizens to overthrow a lawfully elected government through force of arms, and nothing that authorizes government be kept in check through armed rebellion.

 

[justinacolmena]

Unfortunately, many do not believe in God. And some very wealthy and powerful people believe that neither God nor the Constitution will stand
in the way of their claim to power and control. As these claim a larger share and revoke more rights, the Constitutional answer is Militias.

Militias were ALWAYS intended by the Second Amendment for the security of free states which allow or at least permit the lawful ownership of firearms by private citizens without the infringements of gun registration and other paperwork.

Militias were NEVER intended to be restricted to “police and active duty military” only for the security of slave states where guns are banned subject to serial number registration or background check requirements.

 

[progressive hunter]

Militias need to become much larger and better organized.

The Constitution clearly expresses this. Clearly the intent of Militias was to keep government in check as a last resort.

If you are not yet a member of a militia, and you love America and freedom, I think now is the time.

Wrong.

This is a lie.

The Constitution expresses no such thing.

And again: there is nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes insurrectionist dogma, nothing that authorizes citizens to overthrow a lawfully elected government through force of arms, and nothing that authorizes government be kept in check through armed rebellion.

its not insurrection to kickout a person or group of people when they refuse to follow the law that governs them when they are oppressing the people,,

thats called a restoration,,,
and its written clearly in the 2nd amendment,,,

and shove you case law up your ass cause it has nothing to do with the constitution,,,

only an amendment can change the constitution,,,

 

[Natural Citizen]

Tell that to the half-wits that founded this country. The national guard is an arm of the military--under government control. Spin it any way you want to, but the fact remains that when the POTUS activated the national guard to go to Kuwait--they went. What nation were they guarding and why wasn't our powerful-to-the-extreme military not used?

The Federalist is a blueprint for the constitution, by the Framers.

As far as Kuwait - Rep. Ron Paul on the April Glaspie Cable

 

[Natural Citizen]

A majority of American believe the 2020 election was legitimate.

The majority of Americans are morons.

It's just a fact.

Damn, Jones. What the heck are you smoking to be quoting what the majority of Americans think about anything as a reliable source...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What we are saying is that your recourse is a nonviolent one. Elections.

Then why didn't the Original Colonists simply VOTE to be Independent of Great Britain ???

If they had voted, then surely England would have respected that vote according to you?

Because they didn’t have the constitution which gave them the opportunity to do so.

But now we do.

You don't need a Constitution to VOTE.
The Constitution did not give an opportunity for voting. You are confused.
You are negating your own argument. Voting has been taking place all over the world for millennia.

You stated that voting is the ultimate solution to disputes.
You were wrong.

Militias are now needed because among other things, people have decided that stealing elections to grab power is acceptable.

No, you are wrong.

The people have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances through either the political or judicial process.

If the people believe the government has overreached or acted in a manner contrary to the Constitution, or violated the rights of the people, they may seek relief by filing suit in Federal court.

If the people believe an elected official has acted in a manner contrary to the Constitution, or violated the rights of the people, they may seek relief via the political process by voting him out of office – just as Trump was voted out of office.

 

[progressive hunter]

What we are saying is that your recourse is a nonviolent one. Elections.

Then why didn't the Original Colonists simply VOTE to be Independent of Great Britain ???

If they had voted, then surely England would have respected that vote according to you?

Because they didn’t have the constitution which gave them the opportunity to do so.

But now we do.

You don't need a Constitution to VOTE.
The Constitution did not give an opportunity for voting. You are confused.
You are negating your own argument. Voting has been taking place all over the world for millennia.

You stated that voting is the ultimate solution to disputes.
You were wrong.

Militias are now needed because among other things, people have decided that stealing elections to grab power is acceptable.

No, you are wrong.

The people have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances through either the political or judicial process.

If the people believe the government has overreached or acted in a manner contrary to the Constitution, or violated the rights of the people, they may seek relief by filing suit in Federal court.

If the people believe an elected official has acted in a manner contrary to the Constitution, or violated the rights of the people, they may seek relief via the political process by voting him out of office – just as Trump was voted out of office.

they tried that and were rejected on BS grounds,,,

 

[White 6]

Militias are reserved by the state for the sole purpose of using force against federal usurpers.

This ifunction is where 'well regulated' derives.

Unfortunately, what's going on is that some state Republics are doing the federal Republic's dirty work. That's a much deeper discussion.

Recall that America is correctly referred to as a Compound Republic. Or learn it or whatever. I see soa many people misdefine our form of government tht it's just laughable at this point.

Anyway. A bunch of half-wits can't just form a posse and say they're gonna go fight the government. lolol.

Tell that to the half-wits that founded this country. The national guard is an arm of the military--under government control. Spin it any way you want to, but the fact remains that when the POTUS activated the national guard to go to Kuwait--they went. What nation were they guarding and why wasn't our powerful-to-the-extreme military not used?

They operate dual status as necessary. When not called up for federal title 32 duty, they are under the control of the Governor of the state and his Adjutant General. I did a week in Memphis under a call up by the governor. I have friends that were in Memphis twice on state orders, both time to guard against violence or put it down when it came up. It can attest, it is a well regulated force when done right.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Losing an election is not government tyranny and overreach.

You did not read the OP.

Posting before you do makes you a knee jerker

There are MANY examples of government over reach that have been going on for a long time.

Taz read it and so did I. Just admit that you probably think it's okay for violent militia uprisings such as we just saw in DC because idiots didn't like the result of a free and fair election.

this is about the CONSTITUTION.

MILITIAS ARE IN THE CONSTITUTION.

You do not seem to posses the aptitude for reasonable debate.

Where are they in the

Losing an election is not government tyranny and overreach.

You did not read the OP.

Posting before you do makes you a knee jerker

There are MANY examples of government over reach that have been going on for a long time.

Taz read it and so did I. Just admit that you probably think it's okay for violent militia uprisings such as we just saw in DC because idiots didn't like the result of a free and fair election.

this is about the CONSTITUTION.

MILITIAS ARE IN THE CONSTITUTION.

You do not seem to posses the aptitude for reasonable debate.

'Militia groups have for years argued that their actions are constitutionally protected. But legal analysts say the Constitution does not protect private military groups that are unconnected to or outside the authority of the government. In fact, all 50 states prohibit and restrict private militia groups and militia activity with several different kinds of laws as well as provisions included in most state constitutions.
"What we're seeing in the kinds of militias that we see today, these sort of self-appointed militias that have no relationship with the state government whatsoever, no authority to speak for the state or for the people of the state, these are not the kinds of militias that are referenced by the Second Amendment," says Adam Winkler, a professor of law at the University of California at Los Angeles who specializes in constitutional law and gun policy'.

No, that is incorrect.

Whoever told you that the INTENT of the Constitution was not to limit government power and NOT to empower The People to defend against government over reach and tyranny, is themselves a tyrant....and a liar and deceiver.

You are listening to the wrong people

However, you do make an excellent argument for why EVERY AMERICA who values their freedom should find a local Militia and join it today.

That said, be careful...the left is now establishing fake Militias to head off even that last resort.

So give us an example of how a militia would be legally entitled to forcefully respond to a "tyrannical government" - I'm not getting your point.

Read the Constitution....and understand it outside of the misinterpretations offered to you by servants of the Elite and Globalists.

Why do you think there is a 2nd Amendment? All you have to do is THINK for yourself for once for God's sake man !!!

Read the Constitution’s case law – the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, including the Second Amendment.

There is a Second Amendment because the people have the right to self-defense and to posse firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense – not to ‘deter’ crime, not to act in the capacity of ‘law enforcement,’ and not to ‘overthrow’ a lawfully and constitutionally elected government reflecting the will of the people.

 

[Concerned American]

Militias need to become much larger and better organized.

The Constitution clearly expresses this. Clearly the intent of Militias was to keep government in check as a last resort.

If you are not yet a member of a militia, and you love America and freedom, I think now is the time.

Wrong.

This is a lie.

The Constitution expresses no such thing.

And again: there is nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes insurrectionist dogma, nothing that authorizes citizens to overthrow a lawfully elected government through force of arms, and nothing that authorizes government be kept in check through armed rebellion.

Keyword--LAWFULLY. Example, China takes over our government through the use of Arab spring tactics, tech and media, and infiltration of a major party. According to you, our constitution doesn't give the citizens' any recourse. Again, I. and I believe, the founders of the USA would disagree with you.

 

[progressive hunter]

Losing an election is not government tyranny and overreach.

You did not read the OP.

Posting before you do makes you a knee jerker

There are MANY examples of government over reach that have been going on for a long time.

Taz read it and so did I. Just admit that you probably think it's okay for violent militia uprisings such as we just saw in DC because idiots didn't like the result of a free and fair election.

this is about the CONSTITUTION.

MILITIAS ARE IN THE CONSTITUTION.

You do not seem to posses the aptitude for reasonable debate.

Where are they in the

Losing an election is not government tyranny and overreach.

You did not read the OP.

Posting before you do makes you a knee jerker

There are MANY examples of government over reach that have been going on for a long time.

Taz read it and so did I. Just admit that you probably think it's okay for violent militia uprisings such as we just saw in DC because idiots didn't like the result of a free and fair election.

this is about the CONSTITUTION.

MILITIAS ARE IN THE CONSTITUTION.

You do not seem to posses the aptitude for reasonable debate.

'Militia groups have for years argued that their actions are constitutionally protected. But legal analysts say the Constitution does not protect private military groups that are unconnected to or outside the authority of the government. In fact, all 50 states prohibit and restrict private militia groups and militia activity with several different kinds of laws as well as provisions included in most state constitutions.
"What we're seeing in the kinds of militias that we see today, these sort of self-appointed militias that have no relationship with the state government whatsoever, no authority to speak for the state or for the people of the state, these are not the kinds of militias that are referenced by the Second Amendment," says Adam Winkler, a professor of law at the University of California at Los Angeles who specializes in constitutional law and gun policy'.

No, that is incorrect.

Whoever told you that the INTENT of the Constitution was not to limit government power and NOT to empower The People to defend against government over reach and tyranny, is themselves a tyrant....and a liar and deceiver.

You are listening to the wrong people

However, you do make an excellent argument for why EVERY AMERICA who values their freedom should find a local Militia and join it today.

That said, be careful...the left is now establishing fake Militias to head off even that last resort.

So give us an example of how a militia would be legally entitled to forcefully respond to a "tyrannical government" - I'm not getting your point.

Read the Constitution....and understand it outside of the misinterpretations offered to you by servants of the Elite and Globalists.

Why do you think there is a 2nd Amendment? All you have to do is THINK for yourself for once for God's sake man !!!

Read the Constitution’s case law – the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, including the Second Amendment.

There is a Second Amendment because the people have the right to self-defense and to posse firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense – not to ‘deter’ crime, not to act in the capacity of ‘law enforcement,’ and not to ‘overthrow’ a lawfully and constitutionally elected government reflecting the will of the people.

there is no constitution case law,, only an amendment can change the constitution

 

[justinacolmena]

Let's not forget the plot to "take" the Michigan state house and kill the Governor of that state

THAT was a "militia" action as well

I don't have any use whatsoever for that particular state house or governor.

I served 90 days in prison without a trial for no reason whatsoever and the damned cops stole my car, fenced it and parted it out just like the professional thieves they are.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

and most people didnt vote for biden,, whats your point??

The left (at least the Left portrayed by the left media) seems to crave authoritarian rule.

I suspect the actual number of people like the few here that berate Trump and the Constitution are a vastly outnumbered, but highly vocal and Media backed group working in overdrive to consolidate power into the hands of the Globalists and Elites.

Without the actions of militias, there may be no way to stop them at this point.

One of the primary objectives of a Militia should be to get the runaway propaganda machine in check.

Wrong.

Authoritarianism is the sole purview of the right – that you as a conservative would advocate silencing your political opponents through violent force of arms is proof of that.

 

[Concerned American]

lawfully and constitutionally elected government

There's those keywords again.

 

[progressive hunter]

and most people didnt vote for biden,, whats your point??

The left (at least the Left portrayed by the left media) seems to crave authoritarian rule.

I suspect the actual number of people like the few here that berate Trump and the Constitution are a vastly outnumbered, but highly vocal and Media backed group working in overdrive to consolidate power into the hands of the Globalists and Elites.

Without the actions of militias, there may be no way to stop them at this point.

One of the primary objectives of a Militia should be to get the runaway propaganda machine in check.

Wrong.

Authoritarianism is the sole purview of the right – that you as a conservative would advocate silencing your political opponents through violent force of arms is proof of that.

and yet its dems that are currently silencing the opposing voice,,,

 

[Borillar]

Like it or not...America was founded on principles of God Given Human Rights and the control of government power.
While you may not believe in God, many do, and the Unted States of America was SOLIDLY founded on that belief.

Unfortunately, many do not believe in God. And some very wealthy and powerful people believe that neither God nor the Constitution will stand
in the way of their claim to power and control. As these claim a larger share and revoke more rights, the Constitutional answer is Militias.

But are we at a point where their rise and use is justified?

Are Militias the ONLY way to stop the over step of power and the dilution of Constitutional Rights?

Or.......

Should America simply allow the dilution and over step to continue until it is understood that the Constitution is meaningless and that those who grabbed power illegally are entitled to it?

Americans have suffered a countless barrage of Constitutional breaches and the incursions seem to be on the rise.
These affect not only Republicans, but democrats as well.

The Patriot Act for example give the government unConstitutional Powers over basic Rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Illegal Search and seizures and Warrantless searches have become widely accepted.

We are in fact losing our rights. Next up will be the Biden Administrations self proclaimed "duty" to make America "safe" by making
gun ownership very difficult if not impossible.

At what point are militias necessary to slow, stop or reverse these government grabs of power?

Or, are Militias simply outdated fantasies that have no place in the modern world?

I guess by that standard BLM and Antifa are militias standing up to government overreach.

 

[progressive hunter]

Like it or not...America was founded on principles of God Given Human Rights and the control of government power.
While you may not believe in God, many do, and the Unted States of America was SOLIDLY founded on that belief.

Unfortunately, many do not believe in God. And some very wealthy and powerful people believe that neither God nor the Constitution will stand
in the way of their claim to power and control. As these claim a larger share and revoke more rights, the Constitutional answer is Militias.

But are we at a point where their rise and use is justified?

Are Militias the ONLY way to stop the over step of power and the dilution of Constitutional Rights?

Or.......

Should America simply allow the dilution and over step to continue until it is understood that the Constitution is meaningless and that those who grabbed power illegally are entitled to it?

Americans have suffered a countless barrage of Constitutional breaches and the incursions seem to be on the rise.
These affect not only Republicans, but democrats as well.

The Patriot Act for example give the government unConstitutional Powers over basic Rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Illegal Search and seizures and Warrantless searches have become widely accepted.

We are in fact losing our rights. Next up will be the Biden Administrations self proclaimed "duty" to make America "safe" by making
gun ownership very difficult if not impossible.

At what point are militias necessary to slow, stop or reverse these government grabs of power?

Or, are Militias simply outdated fantasies that have no place in the modern world?

I guess by that standard BLM and Antifa are militias standing up to government overreach.

wrong wrong wrong,,, they are communist revolutionaries hell bent on take over and creating their own government,,,

 

[Natural Citizen]

Read the Constitution’s case law – the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, including the Second Amendment.

Still waiting for you to share with us where judicial review is found in Article III, Jones.

Been waiting for...I dunno...years?

It's a product of judicial construction.

 

[Lesh]

Militias need to become much larger and better organized.

The Constitution clearly expresses this. Clearly the intent of Militias was to keep government in check as a last resort.

If you are not yet a member of a militia, and you love America and freedom, I think now is the time.

Wrong.

This is a lie.

The Constitution expresses no such thing.

And again: there is nothing in the history, text, or case law of the Second Amendment that authorizes insurrectionist dogma, nothing that authorizes citizens to overthrow a lawfully elected government through force of arms, and nothing that authorizes government be kept in check through armed rebellion.

its not insurrection to kickout a person or group of people when they refuse to follow the law that governs them when they are oppressing the people,,

thats called a restoration,,,
and its written clearly in the 2nd amendment,,,

and shove you case law up your ass cause it has nothing to do with the constitution,,,

only an amendment can change the constitutio

You morons.

The "Well Regualted Militia" was called out twice in the early days of the Republic to put DOWN insurrection in the WHiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion.

You fuckers pull this shit again and it (The National Guard) will put YOU down as well.

You got a bye this time. It won't happen again.

Don't throw your lives away for an asshole like Trump. He's gone anyway