Quote:
|
Because we read history and see what the militia was. I don't think you do.
|
Not true, TG. Not only have I read it, my family was in it, with my direct ancestors in this country dating back to about 1730, two years before Washington was born. Many of them fought in the Militias, and then the Continental Army, in Berk's county, PA.
Now, while that doesn't make me any more American than last week's immigrant, nor does it make me a militia expert, I do have an interest and identification with this issue beyond the average citizen. And I have read more than enough from our founders to form a view that's probably very clear as to their intent.
You misread my view completely here:
Quote:
|
You look at some commentary from the time and conclude that the individual in some libertarian sense apart from any government or law is the militia. That is not what it was and not what the founders intended it to be. It is the ability of the STATE to raise and arm the militia that the founders protected NOT the "Right" of individuals on their own to form armed militias as they saw fit.
|
Since you are confused about what I have actually said, you will be surprised to know that I agree with that statement. But the MEANS to arm the militia is spelled out in 2A as private ownership of arms, not state-issued arms as you have repeatedly insisted. And those arms need to be up to the task for the amendment to keep it's teeth, for ALL the purposes for which it was written.