Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Antipitas
Good Show, for those that answered quickly!
|
Hey I want extra credit. Not really fair though as you have used that quotation before and I knew it. vranasaurus was quicker on the draw and so I think you should give the extra credit to vranasaurus
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Antipitas
Sadly, you are mistaken, as the actual history of the National Guard would prove.
|
Au contraire, the National Guard is the lineal descendent of the "well regulated" State militias referenced in the 2A. While the NG may be federalized (as could the state militias if Congress called them) it is a part of the Total Force of our military that, while a change, is not in great part different than the power the Fed assumed over the state militias in 1789. Until they are federalized however, they belong to the state and are under the command of the Governor. The "unorganized militia" (a term that did not come about until much much later in our history) that some call the "militia" of today is nothing more than a statutory construct that has no rights, duties, or reponsibilities. The National Guard came into being due to the obvious deficiencies of the miltia system and I agree that officially with the Dick Act;
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Antipitas
That is the true beginning of the National Guard, as we know it today. That is also the end of the State Militias as they were then known.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by vranasaurus
Then why didn't they use the phrase "Individual citizen" in the 1st, 4th, 9th, or 10th amendments?
|
Same same to me. The people or individuals is the same just different language. The point is the 2A was not
just written to guarantee the people's (or individual citizen's) RKBA. The arming of State Militias was a part equally important as well.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LaBulldog
That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
|
Indeed, many credit the BOR as coming from the mind of George Mason who is given credit by some for being the "Father of the BOR" as much as Madison. However, the problem with that form of right is that the militia it speaks of no longer exists. That is why the anti-gunners tried to tie the right to service in the militia.
Heller correctly disengaged the two.