Gun Control Reform Activism

jmg257

(11,996 posts)

29. Because there was no federal militias, the congress had powers...

Tue Apr 2, 2013, 01:07 PM

Apr 2013

not only call forth the state militias, but also

"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be
for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces"

Obvious the "two years" was meant to reduce the capabilities/provisions for maintaing large standing Armies, same purpose as was re-inforced with the 2nd. Don't underestimate the fear and mis-trust of that bane of liberty - a large army!

States however, could not have Armies or "Troops" or maintain Navies, but certainly had to continue to maintain well-regulated militias...our securities depended on them!

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep
Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact
with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War unless actually
invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Why were the state militias so vital??

"...establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty " = "for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union,
suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions" = "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and...against domestic Violence."

Of course the President was also CinC of those forces too.

"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United
States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual
Service of the United States

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I renounce my 2nd amendment right [View all] jimmy the one Mar 2013 OP

Okay. nt rrneck Mar 2013 #1

Thanks for explaining all of that. Many of us agree with you completely. freshwest Mar 2013 #2

Thanks for the notification. Flatulo Mar 2013 #3

the rich were still the rich back then pasto76 Mar 2013 #4

I read that as "chased a duck through a parking lot" Robb Mar 2013 #6

In his defense Orrex Mar 2013 #10

If everyone did as you have done than only nobody would have guns. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #5

So what is the "real" 2013 meaning of the 2A? Is it a complete anachronism? geckosfeet Mar 2013 #7

An anachronism because of the Civil War. And now willfully misinterpreted. Loudly Mar 2013 #16

Fine with me. It's a free country. closeupready Mar 2013 #8

Well you really don't have to relinguish any Right Whoopdedoo Mar 2013 #9

I don't own any guns mercymechap Mar 2013 #11

That’s just like, your opinion, man... Malik Agar Mar 2013 #12

Almost Funny. Mine Was Taken ProgressiveJarhead Mar 2013 #13

I agree with you. airplaneman Mar 2013 #14

As long as guns are legal, MicaelS Mar 2013 #15

The mental health aspect is all fine and wonderful... and totally unrealistic. world wide wally Mar 2013 #17

I gave mine up for Lent. jmg257 Mar 2013 #18

Spot on, Jimmy! CapnSteve Mar 2013 #19

How would the free states end slave patrols? Nothing at all about jmg257 Mar 2013 #21

OK, Let me fill in the gaps for you... CapnSteve Apr 2013 #24

Familiar with all that. So how could the congress dis-ban the state militias? jmg257 Apr 2013 #25

You are confusing federal militias with state militias (aka slave patrols)... CapnSteve Apr 2013 #26

Not at all. You are wrong here. The Constitution uses the term "the Militia" jmg257 Apr 2013 #27

OK, now you are just playing with semantics... CapnSteve Apr 2013 #28

Semantics?? What we are REALLY illustrating here is the VERY VALID USE of STATE militias jmg257 Apr 2013 #30

Because there was no federal militias, the congress had powers... jmg257 Apr 2013 #29

revanchism jimmy the one Apr 2013 #31

Ha - as usual - words of wisdom! (And what I have been saying all along ;)) jmg257 Apr 2013 #32

Just don't give up my 2A rights for me. ileus Mar 2013 #20

You are certainly free to do so. Peter cotton Mar 2013 #22

revisionist history - 2ndA jimmy the one Mar 2013 #23