It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Montana's Possible Move to a State "Home Guard" Militia Group

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Bill would create an armed paramilitary group in Montana

I found this to be a very interesting article and hope that I have not re-posted an existing thread on this but I did not find it in a search of ATS on this topic. Also, was not at all sure where would be an appropriate place for this so if a moderator feels it needs to be moved, feel free!

I post this because I want to get other's take on this particular issue. Also please take note of the quote from Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association on the creation of this state created armed militia group, I find that most interesting!

Could it possibly be that we are finally seeing an emergence in local government, an understanding of the undercurrent of uneasiness and lack of trust in the Federal system that the American public have been feeling for a long time?

Also as I was reading this it came to mind our own Constitution and it's language as it pertains to state militias and the fact that I don't understand, really, why anyone would have any opposition to its creation? Is there any limit to the number of state created militia's a certain state can have? Would not the National Guard be considered the state's militia? The Constitution states:


To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Do I think it's a good idea? Absolutely I do and I will be doing more research into not only this state's progress on this, but other states that this article eludes to. Do I see how this could be abused and essentially hijacked and used for other than it's intended purposes? Absolutely, it is after all a government program.

Anyway, as you can see, I have too many questions coming all at once over this topic to keep my mind on track with this one. So I leave it in your cabable hands, ATS community!




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
It wouldnt fail due to the fact that though it is a " government " agency, it wouldnt be federally governed. It would be the States respectively. That in itself, is a good sign.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I think it's a good idea ta try and get legislature overturned making Militia illegal overturned...We shouldnt have to ask permission from a corrupt Government to protect ourselves from a corrupt Government! Ha if the feds were smart they'd make it seem like they're going for the idea then bust em all for conspiracy against government.... also it being state controlled wouldn't that mean if i committed a crime at 18 and I'm 30 I wouldn't be eligible to help protect our freedoms?



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArieZ
being state controlled wouldn't that mean if i committed a crime at 18 and I'm 30 I wouldn't be eligible to help protect our freedoms?


You know you make a very valid point about that and it's not something I had thought of before! Good thinking outside the box on this. Let's see if I can find the answer to that, or perhaps someone out there in ATSville would already know? My gut on this would be that if there is a criminal past one would not be eligible to participate, but as I was re-reading the article I got the impression that while the 'companies' would have to be OK'd by the Governor the individual bylaws of the company would be of their own making...??

Thanks for weighing in on this!
edit on 9-2-2011 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: Clarification



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
S & F montana! good job


I especially like this comment from the article on the billings gazette website:

There seems to be some confusion about what exactly the duties of this proposed militia would be. Well, if Yellowstone Park explodes, we will all be dead, so that doesn't really count.
Oh, I know! When the Montana medical marijuana law is repealed, we will need a powerful cohort of armed people to deal with the people who suddenly become criminals - we will need somebody to break into their houses, kill their family pets, and haul off the adults to be strung up, as they deserve to be, since they are all just worthless pot. low-lifers on public assistance.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by vermonster
 


Yeah, no kidding right? Perhaps if/when any kind of 'stuff' drops in the pot and any resemblence of law and order is otherwise occupied then...maybe just then...the person who posted that in the Billings discussion thread will understand just what the 'purposed mission' of this militia was to be as they watch the chaos around them... "Ohhhhhh...wait.... thats what that militia thing was all about...."



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
In a way, this is a "back to the past" bill. See many states used to have multiple militias -- over time they were absorbed into national guards. Then in addition many states (I think 22 of them) have what are called "state defense forces". These are not subject to call up by the president but only by the state governor (unlike the state national guards). However Montana does not have a state defense force. The "home guards" militias are really just a form of the "unorganized militia". No uniforms. No formal command structure.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Actually National Guards ARE the state militias. They differ from Army reserve in that the state pays the soldiers and pays for training and equipment etc. Army reserve troops drill one weekend a month as well but are still considered Federal troops with Federal funding. The state governor is the NG commander in chief for any given state. For instance, if a National guard unit of say....Louisiana is getting deployed to the middle east, and hurricane season is approaching and the governor decides that those troops would best be put to use at home, she/he can stop the order deploying them and keep them at home. Most governors would have to have a good reason to go against a formal deployment order from the military, but thats the difference. And who would be in charge of the recruiting of these militias to make sure participants are in good health, have formal training, aren't complete psychopaths/sociopaths etc. etc. There would be alot to consider with a program like this. Not sure I'm for it.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn
 


Texas State Guard

Here is a link to the Texas State Guard website. A lot of good
information, and a good guide to answer questions anyone may have.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Creating a standing army of any type, either state or federal, is unconstitutional. If you are a male, 18 and up, then by the constitution you are the army(and are required to own and supply your own arms). Of course, when needed to repel an INVASION. Anything else is imperialist.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I am a member of the Virginia Defense Force which is a state militia that answers only to the governor. We have uniforms, equipment and training provided. Mostly we get used for natural disasters but we do participate in training year round. One plus is that while the National Guard has 72 hours to mobilize we have 6 hours so we are quicker for the governor to use during a state of emergency. The only sad thing is that we are only 1100 strong.


Secure
edit on 9-2-2011 by xXxtremelySecure because: Spelling



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by retiredTxn
 


Thanks for the link retiredTxn, I appreciate it. I've saved to favorites and will give it a good once over. Your contribution is appreciated



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ghostsoldier78
 


If a militia can be deployed by the Federal government, then how do you consider them to be a STATE MILITIA? It does not make sense to me.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by xXxtremelySecure
 


Nice to see another Virginian! What I find so hard to believe is that in the great state of VA there are only 1100 of you enlisted for state defense. Thanks for your insight on this topic.
edit on 9-2-2011 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: Brain Fart

edit on 9-2-2011 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ghostsoldier78
 


From what I am gathering from both Secure's post and the website that retiredTxn provided along with finally wading through the Montana House Bill itself it looks like Montana's State Defense unit will be very much like Texas' and Virginia's (and I imagine all other states). The Governor will be the Commander in Chief and uniforms, equipment and training will be provided for by the state. There are physical and mental requirements that have to be met, but...and this is the sad part of it all....as we've seen time and again that there is not a 100% guarantee a mentally unstable person won't be listed among the ranks. It happens in every branch of military and law enforcement like it happens in every day life.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
i'm from montana and i haven't heard anything about this yet...thanks for the info s+f



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MyMindIsMyOwn
reply to post by xXxtremelySecure
 


Nice to see another Virginian! What I find so hard to believe is that in the great state of VA there are only 1100 of you enlisted for state defense. Thanks for your insight on this topic.
edit on 9-2-2011 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: Brain Fart

edit on 9-2-2011 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: (no reason given)


We would have more except that we only get paid when we are called up, we do not get paid during drills or training unlike Texas. We are composed of 478 police, 312 firefighters. 54 EMT's, 278 retired or former military and the rest are assorted careers, but we all make time for the state on our own dime.

Secure



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
I am currently in the Texas State Guard. We do not get issued uniforms or get paid for drills. We only get paid wen we deploy. We can only get deployed by the governor and only inside the state of Texas. When we do get deployed we get paid about 55,000 a year before taxes (they tax our pay at the maximum amount) everyone gets paid the same regardless of rank. You can quit when ever you want their is no contract.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
reply to post by ghostsoldier78
 


If a militia can be deployed by the Federal government, then how do you consider them to be a STATE MILITIA? It does not make sense to me.


Used to thats exactly what the National Guard was, a state militia. But thanks to Bushie turning them into a pretty much active duty force alongside the regular Army you might as well join the active ranks nowadays. And I dont "consider" them as state troops, its a fact that they are. Ask anyone in the National Guard and they will tell you that the governor can override federal authority when it comes to deployments. The state governor is the commander. I was in it for 4 years, and I loved it then but would never do it now because I dont want to go back to the desert.

from wikipedia...

Established under Title 10 and Title 32 of the U.S. Code, state National Guard serves as part of the first-line defense for the United States.[4] The state National Guard is divided into units stationed in each of the 50 states and US territories, and operates under their respective state governor or territorial adjutant general.[5] The National Guard may be called up for active duty by state governors or territorial adjutant general to help respond to domestic emergencies and disasters, such as hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes.[5]


edit on 9-2-2011 by ghostsoldier78 because: add a sentence



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Anhur
 


Our pay when deployed is equivalent to what our rank would be paid in the National Guard in VA. We are given one uniform any others come out of our pocket.

Secure



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join