It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Second Amendment:The loss of the free state

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 04:16 PM
We all recognize these words:

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

The second amendment to our beloved Constitution. The intentions of these immortal words have been under much contention over the years. Everyone wants to argue whether this right pertains to state function or to the people in mass.

I contend that it applies to both, as it is stated. The part of the second amendment that people take little note of is “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a FREE State,” The federal government has taken the right for the State to form militia away from them. In the years of my youth the several states had militia. These militias were under the jurisdiction of the Governor of the state.

Slowly but surely the Federal government absorbed them. In my home state our militia was known as the Tennessee Guard. The department of the Army started giving the Tennessee Guard surplus military hardware and Army basic training for the citizen soldiers.

The Tennessee Guard then became the Tennessee National Guard. Under the control of the state Governor. The Tennessee National Guard was only deployable within the State. The National Guard could be used in relief efforts and as a temporary police force in emergent situations.(without over stepping the bounds of posse comitadius)sp?.

Then comes the Army National Guard. The Department of the Army took on more control. With the advent of the volunteer Army. The Army National Guard became the Army Guard .A force that is fully deployable anywhere in the world. As a standing Army they shouldn’t be used as a police force in the states.

As far as I’m aware there are no, strictly state militias left in our country. So evidently there are no FREE states in this country either. The act of organizing a free, state militia will get you labeled as a terrorist in your own country.

We are living in dangerous times indeed.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 04:23 PM
What is there to say against free de-cemtralized state militias. AFAIK TPTB need a 'head' to go after. Wouldn't it be easy to maybe give each household a training-manual and establish caches to be used in times of peril? (this could be organized through the curch, the gun-club, and even the sewing-circle)

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 05:54 PM
It is, in my opinion, a disgrace to all that have fought for our Constitution and our way of life that we, as a people, are reduced to arguing over the semantics of the 2nd Ammendment.
Maybe if the same arguers were so interested in propriety, we'd have more moral backbone and be less apt to accept the perversions of Free Speech, 1st Am. which is designed to not allow quashing of critiques of the Federal Government, not allow the free use of profane language in the media that travels on roads, airwaves, wires, etc. that we all own.
Load up, Lock up and Stand up, we're in for it.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 01:42 PM
Daddyroo45, it's scary, only if you dwell on that too long,the fact that there are really no state controlled militias anymore.
That's why I think Obama is going to get his way and instate a new law requiring all "able body" American citizens will have an indoctrine program that requires mandatory participation,by law, and it will be adapted from military bacic training. Haven't heard the required ages yet but they might be out there.
Anyhow, good thread, the times, they are scary, but we've faced worse and there is no advesary that stands, when the will of the many are standing together, by weapons that are forged in peace and righteousness.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 01:44 PM
I agree my friend!

My only question is what do we do about it. As Americans we are far to disorganized to do anything. I almost feel like all's we can do is sit back and watch it burn and hope we don't get burnt int he process.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:43 PM
reply to post by LAUGHING-CAT

The words you have written are just and true.The PTB have wittled on the Bill of Rights to the point that they even confuse us. The Congress and Senate that we dutifully elect,keep writing new laws that infringe upon our Constitutional rights.Equally our Judicial branch refuses to confront Constitutional issues,or redress petitions of greivences presented to them.
What are we to do?We have broached the legal avenues provided by our highest law,to no avail.
The loss of the States Right to form militia,out from under Federal control,has relegated the State to a subserviant roll. Our Constitution pointed out what powers the Federal Government would hold.The remainder of the powers fell upon the States or the citizens therein.No where can you go and deal with the State government that there is not some Federal requirement or paper work you have to deal with.

The sad fact is we have been living under the rule of a Fedocracy.This hasn't been a Republic in over 150 years.

What are we to do? What remedy would you suggest?

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:57 PM
I feel so strongly about this I created a T-shirt explaining it, listing all the cognate words for "regulated".

The key word is "regulated", and what the Founders meant by it. In the pre-Industrial Age, the word "regulated" had a different meaning than the one we currently infer it to mean, i.e., control of some sort. That meaning didn't arise in prominence until after the advent of machinery that required regulators to control their functions.

When referring to firearms and other military gear, at the time it was written, the word meant equipped.

A check of cognate words in a thesaurus will confirm this, especially the older ones.

So if you read the Second Amendment as "...a well equipped militia...", there is nothing but pure clarity of intent: don't disarm the people, they've a right to their weapons to defend themselves and their country.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by apacheman]

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 03:28 PM
reply to post by RIPNBYA

"That's why I think Obama is going to get his way and instate a new law requiring all "able body" American citizens will have an indoctrine program that requires mandatory participation,by law, and it will be adapted from military bacic training. Haven't heard the required ages yet but they might be out there. "

Therein lies the problem.A Federal mandate for required service.This would be nothing more than a glorified second federal army.Controlled by the pentagon just as the other branches are controlled.If the States had any say in the deployment of these troops,it would be at the behest of the Federal government.
The Federal Government has used extorsion tactics against the State Governments for years.They have done it so long the pratice is considered normal operations.They use the pressure of withholding Federal funds for schools,infra-structure,etc.Until the state meets whatever requirement they mead out.

The only course I can see at this time,is to take our States back.We have to reinstitute the soverign rights of the States.The original States were set up as independent soverign republics.They were not ruled by the Federal Government.The Federal Government had to answer to the demands of the popular majority of States.We need this right taken back.

Each day that passes I see our Congress putting forth bills that erode our rights.It's time to put a stop to it.Let us take our States back!!

new topics

top topics


log in