posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 10:28 AM
Originally posted by Perhaps
how would it be possible for the citizens of the US to organise themselves in such a way that this outcome would be possible??
After all, it doesn't appear that it would be achieved through the electoral/voting process.
I'm going to try to tackle this one. Keep in mind I am myself in the process of digging deeper into this subject as well and trying to tackle it
from a more historical and informed aspect rather than just going about regurgitating the same old same old.
In another thread I posted this article written by a pro-2nd attorney named Daniel J Schultz: lectlaw.com
. He attempts (and does a good job actually) to explain more in depth what the actual wording of "well regulated militia" means. In
his article he references Alexander Hamilton's letter to NY, also known as Federalist #29
In Federalist #29, Hamilton states that indeed the militia is made up of the population of the country that are not enlisted in the standing regular
army and that that militia should be trained and outfitted equally with the standing army of the country. Having said that, he also understands that
to do so is not a quick and easy process and would put undo strain on the progression of industry and agriculture as it would take able bodied
citizens from those industries and hinder their progress.
To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be
under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection
which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and
loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the
people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States.
Source being the Federalist #29 linked
In the following paragraphs it is my interpretation (someone please correct me if I am wrong) that what Hamilton then proposes is a state guard of
sorts to be a bridge between the common citizenry (read militia) and the standing army. This state guard would train as if they were regular army in
the tactics and weaponry of the day and would serve then to train the common citizenry if the need ever arise should the US be invaded by a foreign
force. This 'state guard' could then be called upon to increase the ranks of the standing army against a foreign force leaving the common citizenry
with the tools and knowledge to defend not only themselves but their land as well while the 'state guard' and regular army are off doing what they
must. Now, notice I said "should the US be invaded by a foreign force".....
I get the feeling that the 'state guard' was never meant to serve the interests of the standing army of the US on
meaning our 'state guard' was never meant to be deployed outside the borders of our own nation... like they are now.
So to answer you question of how can this be achieved? As it was intended to do, it cannot if my interpretation is correct there. However what
Hamilton does not address is the veterans of military service who may be willing to take up that duty, where able, in training the common militia
(general citizenry) in tactics at the very least.... weapons is another thing entirely and for another post/thread should it come up.