View Single Post
Old April 28, 2009, 08:09 PM   #59
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,623
Originally Posted by Webleymkv
it did so by protecting the rights of the people (who comprised the militia).
No I think the preferatory clause protected the right of the state to arm the militia (so the Feds couldn't disarm it) and that the operative clause protects the right of individuals to bear arms in their own personal self defense.

Originally Posted by maestro pistolero
Again, how would you characterize the capacity in which citizens would serve, such as the ones mentioned in the Nordyke opinion, when defending the country against foreign invaders, as described by the court?
I wouldn't characterize the capacity at all. Since the advent of nuclear weapons, our possession of them has made such a foreign invasion impossible. We will not fight an enemy of the United States with a militia but a standing army, and navy (or air force).

Two things killed the militia; first most Americans do not like military service and didn't want to serve (this attitude is where the term "unorganized militia" first came from, which was created to get people out of serving in the militia), and second the nature of modern warfare rendered them obsolete.
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Page generated in 0.03262 seconds with 7 queries