Well Regulated Militia

 To my democrat associates; the Second Amendment advocates for a well regulated militia. What constitutes such a militia? Is it the army, the police department? Is it the National Guard? Or is it the people who live on my street? The people who own firearms and practice at least twice a year to make sure they know which end of the gun the bullets exit is another example of a militia. The democrats like to, and do, insist that a well regulated militia has to be the National Guard or the police and sheriff departments. They insist that it cannot be anything else. According to them gun ownership is a privilege and not a right. It is ridiculous, they claim, to even think that our government could ever turn on us. And even if they ever did there is nothing we could do to stop them because the United States Air Force has F16's. 

If there is anything more narrow minded or shallow than a democrat, meeting that individual would be a gas. The truth is We The People own those F16's and we have lots of veterans who know how to fly and maintain them. And we have lots of infantry who know how to defeat the airbase security so we can either destroy or turn those precious aircraft against pilots who would dare to use them on innocent civilians just because a madman in the president's seat wants to take over everything. Democrats in Congress take an oath to defend the Constitution because it is a requirement to serve. In fact their oath is to the democrat party. Conservatives and Republicans take an oath to defend the Constitution, the party comes second. There are probably very few officers in the Air Force who would violate their oath to defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to follow an order to attack a city in America that hadn't been taken over by a foreign power, or a huge group of Americans who had turned against their country. The same is true for the other branches of the military. For any officer to use his or her military might against a civilian population in America who had not first taken arms against the United States of America would be close to impossible. 

What would we do though, if Congress passed a law requiring every citizen to surrender his or her firearms? If such a law were to be enacted what would we do with citizens who banded together against the local constabulary to defend their Second Amendment right? Multiple arguments and papers have been introduced in favor of at least stopping the sale of firearms in America and eventually confiscating all firearms that had been legally registered because Uncle Sam knows where those firearms are. What about the millions of unregistered firearms? When the Constitution was ratified in 1788 the Second Amendment was adopted as part of the Bill of Rights. Even after the debates were over the wording clearly states "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 

For a lot of us that settles the debate. The Constitution guarantees citizens the right to keep and bear arms. It references a well regulated militia, but it still guarantees all citizens the right to keep and bear arms. No matter that some jurist thinks he knows what the people who wrote the Second Amendment had in mind, they wrote, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 

So go ahead and form your government sponsored militias and arm and train them if you can afford it, but keep your guns secured inside your homes if you want. No one is compelled to own a gun if they don't want to, but we are allowed to if we wish. I'm not planning on attacking the United States of America and I hope she never attacks me because that would be a real problem. Remember Shay's Rebellion. It pretty much ended in a stalemate but it involved a group of people in Massachusetts who were being abused by the government and had no legal recourse because it was being denied to them by corrupt politicians. The government in that case actually hired mercenaries to kill anyone who opposed confiscating farms from veterans of the Revolution who were having a hard time repaying debts incurred during the Revolution. Democrats hate Daniel Shay, I love him. 

In the end it was his efforts that forced local government to stop over taxing farmers and stealing their farms. He is another excellent example of the reason why "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." If we wish to maintain our basic rights we have to defend the Second Amendment at all cost. Those who oppose our right to self defense must be defeated if we want to preserve our right to freedom of speech and freedom of worship. Today our First Amendment rights are under assault. People are being forced to agree with the absurdity that there are more than two genders and that if a man thinks he's a woman than he is a woman and the same for women. 

That goes against our freedom of expression and our freedom of worship. If a man wants to call himself a woman that's his business. If he wants government officials to force me to say he's a woman that's my business and I won't do it. The existence of a well regulated militia is fine with me to a point. Maintaining a standing army is expensive and probably unnecessary when the citizenry is well armed and ready to defend their community against attack. There are millions of Americans who would volunteer for duty in a local militia. You know, do it for free including purchasing their own weapons. They should be led by someone with experience and that's simple enough as well. There are lots of veterans who were officers and would be willing to train volunteers under the supervision of locally elected officials. That's actually what people like Hamilton advocated; militias made up of people from the community who knew and trusted each other. 

Democrats don't like the idea of a well regulated militia because they would be somewhat autonomous and difficult to control for political expediency. The National Guard is not a militia since they are available to be called up to fight wars in other countries. A militia would be exempt from that, being kept in reserve strictly to protect the community where they live. The Second Amendment mentions the importance of a well regulated militia and an armed citizenry and I concur with that. Democrats will never accept that concept because their only goal is total control of everyone and militias might not always be ready to attack whomever a local politician wishes to silence. Taking over a free country and subverting the citizens to your will isn't an easy task. Until they've been disarmed and rendered helpless you just cannot do it.