I could use a good James Madison quote, folks.

D

Don Gwinn

Staff Emeritus
I'm in a debate on another board (what's new :rolleyes: ) and one person has actually bothered to try to refute my arguments factually. I want to cultivate the discussion with this individual; the ones who believe in truth can be turned.

His argument is that Madison's famous treatise (in Federalist Paper #45, I think?) on how the militia would overwhelm the federal standing army also contains other elements that show that Madison was talking about a militia organized and commanded by the State government. He's right so far but of course Madison didn't say that the RKBA only matters while you're actually drilling with the militia. I've pointed this out in detail; now I'd like to find a quote from Madison affirming individual right to self-defense, if one exists.

(And yes, I did point out that the militia has been emasculated by state governments, and I did bring up U.S. vs Miller, and I did list all the weapons suitable for militia use that are currently banned.) ;)
 
All I could find for now...

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate [State] governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit to. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." ~Federalist Papers, Article 46 < http://grid.let.rug.nl/welling/usa/fed/fed46.html>January 29, 1788

James Madison:
"The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by [State] governments possessing their affections and confidence." ~Federalist Papers, Article 46 < http://grid.let.rug.nl/welling/usa/fed/fed46.html>January 29, 1788

James Madison:
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."[Guns & Ammo, Feb. 1993, pg. 105]

James Madison:
"The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse."

James Madison:
"The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It poisons the blessing of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows that the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?"


[This message has been edited by Erik (edited April 14, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Erik (edited April 14, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Erik (edited April 14, 2000).]
 
Thanks. We've got the quote from Fed. 46 (duh. I don't even know what's in 45) already over there--that's what he's using to say Madison meant only to arm people for actual militia maneuvers and then only under strict government control.
I think I've effectively refuted that but I'd like to counter attack with a quote showing that Madison explicitly said what we all imagine he thought. Unfortunately I haven't found it and it looks like maybe it's not out there.
 
"Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed -- unlike the citizens of other countries
whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms."
James Madison
 
Don,
I'm still pretty new to the Federalist Papers, but I found this interesting..This piece is written by Hamilton, it doesn't give agrument to RKBA, but seems to me to imply that it is understood.

From Federalist Papers #24
"Previous to the Revolution, and ever since the peace, there has been a constant necessity for keeping small garrisons on our Western frontier. No person can doubt that these will continue to be indispensable, if it should only be against the ravages and depredations of the Indians. These garrisons must either be furnished by occasional detachments from the militia, or by permanent corps in the pay of the government. The first is impracticable; and if practicable, would be pernicious. The militia would not long, if at all, submit to be dragged from their occupations and families to perform that most disagreeable duty in times of profound peace. And if they could be prevailed upon or compelled to do it, the increased expense of a frequent rotation of service, and the loss of labor and disconcertion of the industrious pursuits of individuals, would form conclusive objections to the scheme. It would be as burdensome and injurious to the public as ruinous to private citizens. The latter resource of permanent corps in the pay of the government amounts to a standing army in time of peace; a small one, indeed, but not the less real for being small. Here is a simple view of the subject, that shows us at once the impropriety of a constitutional interdiction of such establishments, and the necessity of leaving the matter to the discretion and prudence of the legislature."
 
I am going to repeat one each from dz and Erik. Added comments are mine.

"No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of citizen and soldier in those destined for the defense of the State. Such are a well regulated Militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen, and husbandman; who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen." James Madison, United States Congress, Bill of Rights Ratification, 1779

(note that 'characters of citizen and soldier' are separate, but should be united in defense. note that the 'well regulated Militia' is made up of those 'who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals'. The fact that they must take up arms implies that they are not regularly armed as an occupation, but may as individuals take up arms when necessary.)


"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. ... Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46. at 243-244

(note he refers to 'the military establishment' and 'the governments' as being separate from 'the people' of a nation. Also remember who finances the National Guard. The feds. They are the organized militia, a new concept not known in the 1700's. Madison's militia is the unorganized militia that was formed early in the last century when the two types were legally separated.)


"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." James Madison, I Annuals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789) [This was Madison's original proposal for the "Second Amendment"]

(note that Madison says the right of the 'people' to 'keep and bear arms shall not be infringed', but does permit the 'religiously scrupulous' to not be forced bear arms in the military sense. However, at no time does he disbar the keeping of arms, nor does he prevent the 'religiously scrupulous' from bearing arms for reasons other than military service as would be used for self-defense or defense of property.)


"A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace." James Madison, The Federalist Papers (No. 46).

(note the 'standing army' is the military under control of the govt. The 'disarmed populace' is equal to 'an enslaved press' as both are threats against tyranny and the aristocracy could not be safe without both even if it had the power of the 'standing army'.)


"The right of the people to keep and bear...arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country..." James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).

(note that these are two sentences. Just because Madison claims the militia of people trained to arms is the best defense of a free country, at no time does he suppose that only members of the well trained militia should have firearms. See the note above regarding the 'religiously scrupulous'. Also remember that the National Guard, as we know it today, did not exist at his time. The National Guard is funded and trained by the federal govt and can be called up to active duty status under the direction of the federal govt at anytime. Effectively, a branch of the standing army. They are not the armed citizens that Madison envisioned who would keep an oppressive standing army in check, the NG is actually part of what we are to watch.)

Hope it helps and good luck. I love a good debate.
 
This isn't Madison, but it is almost perfect. From www.guncite.com

Michigan Supreme Court Justice Thomas Cooley, a leading constitutional commentator of the late 1800s, wrote "Principles of Constitutional Law." He said of the
Second Amendment:

"The Right is General. -- It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only
guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been elsewhere explained, consists of those persons who, under the law, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon….The meaning of the provision, undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose, but this enables the government to have a well regulated militia;".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top