<p>isnt’ a militia the national guard and the army</p>
<p>not my neighbors with assault rifles</p>
<p>why does a hunter need an assault rifle anyway, doesn’t seem very manly</p>
<p>Google “What is the militia” and you will find a very broad application in historical context.</p>
<p>Legally, the “militia” is
</p>
<p>The National Guard came about in the 1917 (IIRC), some 130years after the Constitution. It is also federally funded, controlled, and equiped (as are all the Active Duty branches)…hardly a state militia like the early American ones!</p>
<p>A deer hunter doesn’t need an assault rifle, but deer hunting is not the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.</p>
<p>Some of the militia in Iraq are pretty well organized. They seem to be pretty well positioned to keep the central government from exercising too much power.</p>
<p>You say “militia,” I say “insurgents.”</p>
<p>I think it would be great if all our gun nuts shipped out for Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon. Would potentially solve two sets of problems.</p>
<p>Haha, Greybeard makes an excellent point. Have any of the people arguing the theoretical “resist the government” thought about what that might actually look like if it happened?</p>
<p>No respectable deer hunter uses an M-16 style or AK-47 style rifle for hunting unless that’s all he has. </p>
<p>While hunting, you may fire one or two shots total - if - you are skilled and lucky. Both of those rifles would be a royal pain to use for hunting.</p>
<p>However, like raimius states, A2 is not about hunting except in a secondary sense. A2 is all about retaining the right to resist tyranny first. An M-16 or AK style rifle then makes perfect sense for that use. This is not to say the common deer rifle has no use for military purposes, it simply has some severe limitations if pressed into military-style use.</p>
<p>What’s the difference between an “insurgent” and a “patriot”? </p>
<p>Victory.</p>
<p>We must hang together, gentlemen…else, we shall most assuredly hang separately.
Benjamin Franklin
US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)</p>
<p>See:
[Quote</a> Details: Benjamin Franklin: We must hang together,… - The Quotations Page]
(<a href=“Quote Details: Benjamin Franklin: We must hang together,... - The Quotations Page”>Quote Details: Benjamin Franklin: We must hang together,... - The Quotations Page)</p>
<p>
It would be a terrible day for US citizens. I would imagine it would be much like the civil war combined with Vietnam or Afghanistan. I hope it never occurs.</p>
<p>The US issued hunting rifles to Snipers in Vietnam. It worked quite well, except the military changed to a synthetic stock because the wood stocks on the civilian versions were warping in the jungle climate.</p>
<p>First we should consider that almost all members of the military are also US citizens. They swear an oath to the Constitution, not any despot. Any suggestion this is plausible first would mean the Constitution had been overthrown which is extremely unlikely. Secondly it would mean the members of the military support a non-Constitutional regime, which they have sworn not to do. I sincerely doubt the vast majority of our military would ever abandon the Constitution.</p>
<p>While A2 may never fulfill its original purpose does not mean we should ever give up the right, however unlikely it would be to need it.</p>
<p>“I sincerely doubt the vast majority of our military would ever abandon the Constitution.”</p>
<p>You have greater faith than I do in the tendency of ordinary people to stand up to their leadership at immense risk to themselves. This is no slur on our soldiers or any of the rest of us…social psychology research and the historical record both suggest that most people will obey authority whether the authority came to power legitimately or not. It’s doubly difficult for soldiers, who have been trained in unquestioning obedience and in loyalty to their fellows, to stand up alone and say “I won’t obey that illegal order, and you can go ahead and shoot me, sir.” It can be done – heroes do it – but it’s not typical human behavior.</p>
<p>If we consider history, the Civil War was fairly slow to ramp up to real conflict. I’d suggest this would be repeated, if such conflict ever occurred. I believe Hell would be frozen over long before the power of our military would be unleashed on American citizens. Yes, we have some fierce warriors and powerful weapons. However, each soldier, sailor, airman and Marine is lead by a passion, I believe, that strongly relates to safety and health at home first.</p>
<p>Our republic has long abhorred a standing army. We tend not to trust them. The only reason we have one today is that we remember WWII and the Cold War. China, perhaps, gives reason for a standing army; but China historically is not a hegemonistic power and we carry on substantial trade every day with China. Note that after WWI our Army, such as it was, was allowed to rapidly demobilize to the point America was quite weak at the start of WWII. </p>
<p>Of course, were China to embark on a policy of adventureism, merely rearming Japan with significant weapons would give mighty China pause and cause the pragmatic leadership to think of a more profitable path. Remember, we did not invade mainland Japan for specific reasons during WWII. China sees an armed and aggressive Japan in nightmares.</p>
<p>I think the military would loose most of its effectiveness if a tryrannical govenment took over. P2N is correct that the military takes its oath to the Constitution seriously. Unfortunately, totalitarian regimes usually twist and modify laws so it is more difficult to say “that’s illegal” until it is too late. The military would probably splinter in such an event. Hopefully that type of situation can be prevented by legal checks-and-balances.</p>
<p>^ I tend to agree with that - I think that most of the military would disobey orders to subdue the American populace for a tyrannical government (at least its my hope). Similarly for most police officers. However, I was amazingly disappointed in law enforcement when they actually followed through with that criminal Ray Nagin’s order to go door to door and seize all firearms from residents of New Orleans. On the other hand, I’m glad most state governments have recognized the supreme mistake that was and have passed legislation specifically banning the seizure of legally owned firearms in times of emergency (when you need them most :rolleyes:)</p>
<p>The one thing about America is that our system does not always prevent bad decisions, it mostly provides for a process to correct them.</p>
<p>Not perfect, but the ship corrects back onto course. Correcting A2 would be a way to make some of those oscillations more shallow.</p>
<p>“I think that most of the military would disobey orders to subdue the American populace for a tyrannical government”</p>
<p>[Kent</a> State shootings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings]Kent”>Kent State shootings - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Japanese</a> American internment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment]Japanese”>Internment of Japanese Americans - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Kent state was a mistake. Several of the military there thought they heard shots fired, but it could never be proven and was likely a mistake.</p>
<p>The Japanese internment was a horrible act. Hopefully we, as a country, learned something from that. I gladly noted that nothing like that was seriously suggested after 9/11.</p>
<p>I think it has more to do with the slow shift toward total government power becomming a threat. Small shifts in authority are much harder to fight against.</p>
<p>“First we should consider that almost all members of the military are also US citizens. They swear an oath to the Constitution, not any despot.”</p>
<p>Like Robert E. Lee, a traitor to his oath and to the Constitution, who has his own statue in the Capitol Rotunda.</p>
<p>After Pearl Harbor, the country was in shock. This was also an era of substantial racial prejudice. No apology for history - it is what it is.</p>
<p>No apology for Robert E. Lee. He was a great military leader. He followed his state, which he considered his greatest concern. He also placed himself in harm’s way for years. He could have been hung if caught as a traitor. </p>
<p>His side lost and subsequently paid a very high price. My alma mater - FSU - was occupied and virtually destroyed after the Civil War as it produced a military unit that defended Tallahassee from capture. It took decades to recover.</p>
<p>Like I wrote, America is not perfect. It does tend to correct errors, which is more than can be said for many governments.</p>
<p>Right to bear arms continued.</p>
<p>Mall shooting witnesses: We heard about 40 shots</p>
<p>A gunman killed eight people and wounded five others Wednesday at the popular Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, before apparently turning the gun on himself, police said.</p>
<p>[Police:</a> Nine killed in shooting at Omaha mall, including gunman - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/05/mall.shooting/index.html]Police:”>Police: Nine killed in shooting at Omaha mall, including gunman - CNN.com)</p>
<p>so sad…and what is really sad as that many people said he was suicidal, odd, etc, and yet he was allowed to walk around with guns, to go “hunting”</p>
<p>what are people thinking?</p>