The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - A thought on the common topic of general militia usage

RDak · January 2, 2010, 08:48 AM

TG: You know I always enjoy these threads also.

I need to get my thoughts back on track, so can I ask you these questions? (I've forgotten how far you go with the government involvement aspect of militias and, since I agree with Al's view on militias, I need to get a little better handle on how you feel.)

Do you feel the unorganized militia can only be "legitimized" when qualifying people are called upon by governmental entities to enlist and participate in a well regulated militia?

What rights do you see the unorganized militia having in organizing themselves in doomsday types of scenarios mentioned in the original post?

Let's say we are in deep, deep trouble and society has "broken down".

Could a group of us determine that someone like yourself, with military experience, be appointed as an officer to organize us into a workable force? And would this "appointment" fall under the framework of what the FF's intended a well regulated militia might evolve into?

ETA: I'm not talking about enacted statutes over the years because we all know legislators will never write out governmental involvement in areas such as this. It just never happens IMHO.

I look to Federalist Paper No. 29 alot when getting into gray areas and feel Hamilton's paper provides the "flavor" of what the militia system was all about at the time of the FF's. It is a "preamble" so to speak.

What I'm asking is your opinion as to what the FF's might say regarding situations not comptemplated at that time (i.e., where governments have broken down and there are only the unorganized masses wandering around).

I would say we do have the authority, under the "flavor" of the Constitution, to organize ourselves into a well regulated militia in such doomsday scenarios.

http://jim.com/federalist/fed29.htm

January 2, 2010, 08:48 AM	#113
RDak Senior Member Join Date: October 17, 2004 Location: Michigan Posts: 734	TG: You know I always enjoy these threads also. I need to get my thoughts back on track, so can I ask you these questions? (I've forgotten how far you go with the government involvement aspect of militias and, since I agree with Al's view on militias, I need to get a little better handle on how you feel.) Do you feel the unorganized militia can only be "legitimized" when qualifying people are called upon by governmental entities to enlist and participate in a well regulated militia? What rights do you see the unorganized militia having in organizing themselves in doomsday types of scenarios mentioned in the original post? Let's say we are in deep, deep trouble and society has "broken down". Could a group of us determine that someone like yourself, with military experience, be appointed as an officer to organize us into a workable force? And would this "appointment" fall under the framework of what the FF's intended a well regulated militia might evolve into? ETA: I'm not talking about enacted statutes over the years because we all know legislators will never write out governmental involvement in areas such as this. It just never happens IMHO. I look to Federalist Paper No. 29 alot when getting into gray areas and feel Hamilton's paper provides the "flavor" of what the militia system was all about at the time of the FF's. It is a "preamble" so to speak. What I'm asking is your opinion as to what the FF's might say regarding situations not comptemplated at that time (i.e., where governments have broken down and there are only the unorganized masses wandering around). I would say we do have the authority, under the "flavor" of the Constitution, to organize ourselves into a well regulated militia in such doomsday scenarios. http://jim.com/federalist/fed29.htm Last edited by RDak; January 2, 2010 at 09:15 AM.