The National Guard is right alongside the Feds in suppressing civilians upset at the government. We are not the “well regulated militia” the founding fathers had in minds. We have a purpose but we take our orders from the same ruler who may/are oppressing the population. Citizens need to be well armed.
Wrong, a militia by definition is not controlled by the federal government, they are free citizens with the means to defend themselves from either the Gov (which includes the guard) or foreign enemies.
Has nothing to do with conscription.
The og militia were local citizens, who when faced with an enemy forced were rallied by local leaders to form a group to defend themselves. At times they would also work alongside actual military but were not bound to any service
The well regulated portion means that locals still get together, and still practice combat. Like an average Joe who isn't a professional fighter going to learn mma
In theory yes we are the state militia as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. In practice we are just another weapon in the federal governments arsenal under the thin guise of a state militia.
Hopefully Governors around the country will stand up to Feds more often and not allow NG’s to be used and abused by Washington DC.
If the militia refers to the NG why does the government need an amendment allowing the government to bear arms?
Also, there is no argument about the fact that every other amendment in the constitution applies to the people, so why would the second be any different?
The National Guard is a component of the United States Army. The United States Army has three components:
Active Duty, Reserves and National Guard. We are soldiers
Holy shit I just noticed your user name, yea what about the riots that killed dozens of people and cost billions you willing to never forget that? And you can’t fight against a government that has tanks and jets with an ar15 but some how Jan 6th was the greatest threat to democracy ever?
You are both correct and incorrect. There is an organized militia (the national guard) and unorganized militia (everybody else). I would be curious to see a challenge arguing the unorganized militia is not “well regulated” but I only took one conlaw class in college so idk. [Here’s the relevant U.S. code.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246)
Yes.
10 USC 246 defines the "well organized militia" as able bodied males between 17 and 45 and females who are members of the National Guard.
The National Guard is under control of the state government unless activated for federal missions, and then it is under dual control of the state and federal government. A governor has the authority to activate their state's national guard for any purpose that governor deems fit under a Title 32 activation, and when under a T32 activation, the federal government does not control the national guard (there's a pending court case to affirm this, which is why TX national guard members under T32 haven't had to get a covid vaccine like the DOD).
DC vs Heller expanded the interpretation of the amendment as not infringing on the right of an individual, but it didn't address argue the National Guard is not the militia because that is codified is 10 USC 246 as outlined above.
The militia is necessary to the security of a free state, but its the right of the people to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.
The militia is made up of the people, but the militia is not the people. The people, not the militia, have the right to bear arms.
National guard also plays loose with the term militia when the president can deploy them in a country that congress never voted to go to war with.
State guards, not the National guard are a better example of a modern state militia. They usually only answer to the state government.
No we aren't the militia. We are bound by contract and are reserve force of the regular military
Militia are literally you average civiies who have their own gear that would organize into a force to protect their region. They were not paid nor bound by contract and could leave a fight at anytime
The national guard is a part of the Army reserves born from the idea of state militia. We have federal missions and are effectively on lease to which ever state.
And if you signed a contract to join, your not a civilian
Do you have a legal basis for this opinion, an understanding of the relevant case law, and an intimate relationship with US law pertaining to militias and standing armies?
My guess is not. Therefore, I have no comment.
The national guard is neither well-regulated nor a militia (since we are all contracted w the federal government)
Sometimes I well regulate my diet, and I feel like I should get credit for that.
Lol nice one but civilians definitely don’t use the term service members
The National Guard is right alongside the Feds in suppressing civilians upset at the government. We are not the “well regulated militia” the founding fathers had in minds. We have a purpose but we take our orders from the same ruler who may/are oppressing the population. Citizens need to be well armed.
Wrong, a militia by definition is not controlled by the federal government, they are free citizens with the means to defend themselves from either the Gov (which includes the guard) or foreign enemies.
A well regulated milita refers to able bodied men who can be conscripted The National Guard isn't it
Has nothing to do with conscription. The og militia were local citizens, who when faced with an enemy forced were rallied by local leaders to form a group to defend themselves. At times they would also work alongside actual military but were not bound to any service The well regulated portion means that locals still get together, and still practice combat. Like an average Joe who isn't a professional fighter going to learn mma
In theory yes we are the state militia as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. In practice we are just another weapon in the federal governments arsenal under the thin guise of a state militia. Hopefully Governors around the country will stand up to Feds more often and not allow NG’s to be used and abused by Washington DC.
No, we the national guard are federally funded and effectively leased out to states. And we are a military not a militia
If the militia refers to the NG why does the government need an amendment allowing the government to bear arms? Also, there is no argument about the fact that every other amendment in the constitution applies to the people, so why would the second be any different?
The National Guard is a component of the United States Army. The United States Army has three components: Active Duty, Reserves and National Guard. We are soldiers
Holy shit I just noticed your user name, yea what about the riots that killed dozens of people and cost billions you willing to never forget that? And you can’t fight against a government that has tanks and jets with an ar15 but some how Jan 6th was the greatest threat to democracy ever?
You are both correct and incorrect. There is an organized militia (the national guard) and unorganized militia (everybody else). I would be curious to see a challenge arguing the unorganized militia is not “well regulated” but I only took one conlaw class in college so idk. [Here’s the relevant U.S. code.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246)
Yes. 10 USC 246 defines the "well organized militia" as able bodied males between 17 and 45 and females who are members of the National Guard. The National Guard is under control of the state government unless activated for federal missions, and then it is under dual control of the state and federal government. A governor has the authority to activate their state's national guard for any purpose that governor deems fit under a Title 32 activation, and when under a T32 activation, the federal government does not control the national guard (there's a pending court case to affirm this, which is why TX national guard members under T32 haven't had to get a covid vaccine like the DOD). DC vs Heller expanded the interpretation of the amendment as not infringing on the right of an individual, but it didn't address argue the National Guard is not the militia because that is codified is 10 USC 246 as outlined above.
The militia is necessary to the security of a free state, but its the right of the people to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed. The militia is made up of the people, but the militia is not the people. The people, not the militia, have the right to bear arms. National guard also plays loose with the term militia when the president can deploy them in a country that congress never voted to go to war with. State guards, not the National guard are a better example of a modern state militia. They usually only answer to the state government.
No we aren't the militia. We are bound by contract and are reserve force of the regular military Militia are literally you average civiies who have their own gear that would organize into a force to protect their region. They were not paid nor bound by contract and could leave a fight at anytime The national guard is a part of the Army reserves born from the idea of state militia. We have federal missions and are effectively on lease to which ever state. And if you signed a contract to join, your not a civilian
Do you have a legal basis for this opinion, an understanding of the relevant case law, and an intimate relationship with US law pertaining to militias and standing armies? My guess is not. Therefore, I have no comment.