The rules of organizing milita

[rupol2000]

Constitution, establishing the President as Commander in Chief of the part of the militia in actual service to the nation

it has nothing to do with the state militia

 

[1srelluc]

The first rule of organizing a militia is not to mention organizing a militia on a public forum because the next thing you know you have the FBI and all other manner of .gov "fellow enthusiasts" wanting to join.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

2nd Amendment provides the creation of the state militia to defend the rights of the people of the state. What is the mechanism for creating such a militia, is it stipulated somewhere? Could it be a spontaneous militia, should its creation first be discussed at the level of the State Council, or should there be a plebescite. Is this mechanism regulated by the law? What are the rules for the legal formation of a militia?

Why should a foreigner like you give a shit about our militia?

 

[2aguy]

It does no such thing.
The power to create state militia is held by the states; the federal government can specify the arming and training for same.
The federal government can, under certain, circumstances, federalize these state militia units.
None of this comes from the 2nd Amendment.

It is a simple sentence and even with that, leftists either cant read it or they pretend not to understand it.....

 

[rupol2000]

our

I don't consider you an American. You are a parasite in the body of the American people.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I know that they were allowed to serve in the army in 2016, but this is the federal army

Does the US have a law that allows women to own weapons and participate in militias?

You are dumber than a box of hammers and a classic misogynist!

Women have served in the Army for years! In 2016, my daughter became a commissioned officer in the Army, following thousands of other women before her. My daughter-in-law joined the Army in 2006, along side my son.

Every job (MOS) in the Army is open to women.

I should know. I am a civilian, but recruit for the US Army via the internet.

 

[rupol2000]

You are dumber than a box of hammers and a classic misogynist!

Women have served in the Army for years! In 2016, my daughter became a commissioned officer in the Army, following thousands of other women before her. My daughter-in-law joined the Army in 2006, along side my son.

Every job (MOS) in the Army is open to women.

I should know. I am a civilian, but recruit for the US Army via the internet.

As far as I know, this was introduced under Obama. Perhaps the Army previously had women as servants with shoulder straps, for example, she could carry coffee, but this is not about real military positions.
Incidentally, it was at this time that the United States lost its military positions in Eastern Europe, reducing the missile defense.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I don't consider you an American. You are a parasite in the body of the American people.

You don't know what I consider you to be!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

As far as I know, this was introduced under Obama. Perhaps the Army previously had women as servants with shoulder straps, for example, she could carry coffee, but this is not about real military positions.
Incidentally, it was at this time that the United States lost its military positions in Eastern Europe, reducing the missile defense.

Google works or whatever internet search engine you use!

"In 1970, women were finally allowed to rise to command roles in non-combat units, and women and men began training together."

"In 2013, women achieved full status in the military when they were granted the right to serve in direct ground combat roles."

How Women Fought Their Way Into the US Armed Forces | HISTORY

U.S. women served their country bravely during multiple wars. But once the fighting stopped, they were expected to step down.

www.history.com

In June 2021, my daughter assumed command of an air assault combat unit from a male officer. Her commander of the Sustainment Brigade is a female Lieutenant Colonel.

We lost our positions in Eastern Europe? Is that why the US Army's 2nd Cavalry Division has bases in Poland?

 

[rupol2000]

"In 1970, women were finally allowed to rise to command roles in non-combat units, and women and men began training together."

Why didn't Reagan cancel this hipsterism?

 

[rupol2000]

In June 2021, my daughter assumed command of an air assault combat unit from a male officer. Her commander of the Sustainment Brigade is a female Lieutenant Colonel.

Who pays for additional personnel loss insurance after commanding a Barbie?

 

[9thIDdoc]

LOL. I'm actually the person here that doesn't look to, or rely on, the Bill of Rights for my rights.



The Constitution is a charter of conferred powers, powers "We the People" have granted to government. That "We the People" conferred (surrendered) the power to call-up, organize, train and deploy the citizens as militia to Congress, means that we can no longer claim any of those actions as a right.

Of course that principle flows in the opposite direction . . . The powers that "We the People" have retained and withheld and not conferred to the care and control of government, government can claim no interest in. Those retained powers are then called "rights", which are nothing more than "exceptions to powers which are not granted" to government (Federalist 84).

While the militia is drawn from the citizenry, it is not citizens forming themselves into militia, independent of law; no right to such action survives for as long as the Constitution is in force . . . Which is why, again, a state law that forbids bodies of citizens to associate together as a military organization, to drill or parade with arms unless authorized by law, does not violate the Constitution, or any right of the citizen secured by the Constitution.

Again, read Presser and DC v Heller.

The Constitution is a charter of conferred powers, powers "We the People" have granted to government. That "We the People" conferred (surrendered) the power to call-up, organize, train and deploy the citizens as militia to Congress, means that we can no longer claim any of those actions as a right.

Conferred does not mean surrendered. Nor does it state that only Congress (part of the federal government) can form militia. Congress has provided for the formation of the military who are employed by the federal government. Militia=civilians. Military=government employees. Throughout much of our past in many cases militia units (civilian) were "federalized" to become part of the military and government employees.

means that we can no longer claim any of those actions as a right.
Means no such thing. The Constitution in the Bill of Rights lists the Rights of individual citizens. The Constitution gives certain specific powers to government. The government has no Rights and it certainly cannot take the Rights already given to the individual citizen except through due process.

While the militia is drawn from the citizenry, it is not citizens forming themselves into militia, independent of law; no right to such action survives for as long as the Constitution is in force . .

Obviously untrue. As noted the vast majority of militia units were NOT formed by government or by Congress. You continue to confuse militia with regular military. Two entirely different things.

 

[Abatis]

"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State"

I am quite aware of what the 2nd Amendment says and I understand that the declaratory clause is merely a statement of principle. It reaffirms what once was a universally understood and accepted maxim; that the armed citizenry dispenses with the need for a standing army (in times of peace) and those armed citizens stand as a barrier to foreign invasion and domestic tyranny (thus ensuring the free state).

As I said; "the 2nd Amendment does not speak to militia in any legal manner, shape or form. The 2nd Amendment has never been examined to inform on any aspect of militia organization or control."

I am talking about actual legal effect, not any mystical effect that no court has ever recognized and only collectivist political activists have advanced. No court has ever used the 2nd Amendment to inform upon any question about militia powers or to settle any disputes on militia issues between states and the federal government.

The lines of militia law and RKBA/2ndA law are entirely different and separate. The cases where SCOTUS decided militia issues are a separate and distinct track from the Court's RKBA/2ndA cases.

If your theory had any truth to it, there would be some overlap, the Supreme Court would been seen citing the 2nd Amendment for some instruction or direction on how to decide militia issues . . . But there is NOTHING, in fact, the Supreme Court only mentioned the 2nd Amendment once in its militia cases, it was the very first one, in 1820, in a dissent by Justice Story, to only say the 2nd Amendment offered NOTHING to inform the Court on militia issues.

I am aware that you are in crowded company of uninformed people who hang all kinds of adornments and gingerbread on the 2nd Amendment, to make a perverse political argument that it does something it does not.

You should stop doing that.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why didn't Reagan cancel this hipsterism?

Why should he? It's not hipsterism, which by the way, is an archaic term. He was not a misogynist like you and appointed the first female justice to the Supreme Court.

I was assigned to my first ship in the Navy in 1979. My ship was the first to have a female ship's doctor! Coincidentally, I was her first patient!

All but one of my current specialists are women, yet every surgeon I have had was male, as is my primary care physician and endocrinologist. My endocrinologist has a female physician's assistant that I see fairly often too.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Who pays for additional personnel loss insurance after commanding a Barbie?

What the fuck does that mean? Find someone who speaks English to help you with your posts.

 

[rupol2000]

began training together

How is this technically possible? Why would I, for example, spar with a woman if it is no different from sparring with an ant and I might accidentally crush her? Who will be responsible if I accidentally kill her during sparring?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I am quite aware of what the 2nd Amendment says and I understand that the declaratory clause is merely a statement of principle. It reaffirms what once was a universally understood and accepted maxim; that the armed citizenry dispenses with the need for a standing army (in times of peace) and those armed citizens stand as a barrier to foreign invasion and domestic tyranny (thus ensuring the free state).

As I said; "the 2nd Amendment does not speak to militia in any legal manner, shape or form. The 2nd Amendment has never been examined to inform on any aspect of militia organization or control."

I am talking about actual legal effect, not any mystical effect that no court has ever recognized and only collectivist political activists have advanced. No court has ever used the 2nd Amendment to inform upon any question about militia powers or to settle any disputes on militia issues between states and the federal government.

The lines of militia law and RKBA/2ndA law are entirely different and separate. The cases where SCOTUS decided militia issues are a separate and distinct track from the Court's RKBA/2ndA cases.

If your theory had any truth to it, there would be some overlap, the Supreme Court would been seen citing the 2nd Amendment for some instruction or direction on how to decide militia issues . . . But there is NOTHING, in fact, the Supreme Court only mentioned the 2nd Amendment once in its militia cases, it was the very first one, in 1820, in a dissent by Justice Story, to only say the 2nd Amendment offered NOTHING to inform the Court on militia issues.

I am aware that you are in crowded company of uninformed people who hang all kinds of adornments and gingerbread on the 2nd Amendment, to make a perverse political argument that it does something it does not.

You should stop doing that.

Rupol is a paid Russian poster. He cannot speak English, so he uses translation services on the internet. He has some incredibly wrong ideas about our military in general.

 

[9thIDdoc]

WACs, WAVES, and WASPS

wacs and waves - Google Search

1942 saw the creation of the first service branches for women in the military beyond nursing, the Women's Auxillary Army Corps (WAAC) and its naval analog, the Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service (WAVES) and airborn division, the Women's Auxiliary Ferrying Squadron (WAFS). ...

I served in the US Army in '69 and later I served and trained with women.

 

[rupol2000]

Why should he?

because Republicans do not tolerate women who walk away from their kitchen duties by mimicking a man.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

How is this technically possible? Why would I, for example, spar with a woman if it is no different from sparring with an ant and I might accidentally crush her? Who will be responsible if I accidentally kill her during sparring?

My daughter is an amateur boxer and would kick your ass from here to Sunday. She spars with men! She also rappels better than about 99% of other soldiers because she loves doing it!

You keep forgetting that other then special operations, hand-to-hand combat means you have already lost. We discussed this before. You think you are some kind of macho man, but I suspect you are a 98 pound weakling who never served in the military.