When one speaks of “a well regulated 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." - 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

The one big difference between the militia of the 2nd Amendment and a professional army is the militia is not made up of full-time professional soldiers.  Such soldiers could be used against the people as King George had used his mercenaries and Redcoats.  Members of the militia would be less likely to turn on their neighbors and fellow citizens. Such was the wisdom of the Founders.

Who are the militia?  The 2nd Amendment also states “the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."  Who are the “people” in this phrase? You maybe? Also if guns of the "people" are outlawed and the 2nd Amendment interpreted away or repealed… it would require force (or threat thereof) against "the people" to disarm them. Is that the very thing the 2nd Amendment and the militia was to prevent?  Where would “such men be less likely to turn on the population” be in this scenario?

To forcibly confiscate millions of weapons and ammo from possibly resistant citizens… could require much “gun violence” with many possible dead, wounded, imprisoned.  A possible carnage… all to end the “epidemic of gun violence” #RustyIrony. The very thing the militias were created to prevent per Founders would have to happen in a LARGE way!  As there were no repeating guns in 1791, there also was no National Guard… Militias were STATE regulated, not part of the Federal government. It took a declaration of war to nationalize these militias.  The Navy was the only Federal military force.

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?