Setanta wrote:Fedral wrote:Advocate wrote:The militia qualification is real whether you like it or not. Essentially all courts, not just liberal ones, recognize this.
During the 1700's the militia was defined as every free, able bodied male in an area.
That is a false statement. It is precisely because of restrictions on participation in the militia that the second amendment provisions were seen as necessary.
Setanta, you have little or no idea about what you speak.
I was born and raised in New Jersey, one of those little states that's been around longer than the country. The town I grew up in has a graveyard with the men and women lost in the Revolutionary war. There are numerous families in my town that could recite the names of every ancestor of theirs that was killed in every war from the French and Indian War to Iraq part deux.
One of the New Jersey National Guard regiments that my father served in, traced its formation back to the Revolution. I grew up reading about these people and I believe that I have a grasp of how the militia system worked in Jersey (Although your state may vary, I can't speak with as much absolute certainty of the states in the south.)
The militia was, in our neck of the woods, just about every free, able bodied man who could bear arms for the protection of his village/town/state. Depending on the organizational level, they trained to march and fire and comport themselves with some level of professionalism (Depending on the drive of their commanders.) and readied themselves in case of hostile attack. (Most of this was an outgrowth of a time when hostile Native American tribes were the greatest threat.) This is the genesis of the 'militia'. To believe that the Founding Fathers were indicating the Second Amendment meant the National Guard or Reserves, neither of which existed when they wrote the document, is the height of revisionist history.
If you want to know the true feelings of the Founding Fathers as to how they felt about the ownership of firearms:
No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.
We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;
Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.
To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.
John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
[C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded.
Roger Sherman during House consideration of a militia bill (1790): 14 Debates in the House of Representatives, ed. Linda Grand De Pauw. (Balt., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972), 92-3.
Or is it still not clear to you that they were NOT talking about the freaking National Guard in those passages?
