why dont pro gun states establish a militia

H

horatioo

New member
The state could offer training to anyone joining. They could mandate some sort of time commitment to anyone who joins. It would be much less formal then a national guard. They could mandate anyone who joins have certain type guns and certain type ammo.

As long as it was professionally run, I would imagine lots of people would join. In my state, Missouri, the state could use these people when the Mississippi floods or tornadoes hit. I dont think the cost would be prohibitive. Retired or not retired police and military could teach much for free or limited expense. I would imagine lots of volunteers.

I dont think the constitution means that a person has to be part of a formal militia to own a gun, but if a person was then it is even that much harder to argue the 2nd amendment doesnt allow these people guns.

What do you think? Good idea or dumb?

Steve
 
Here you go dude:

http://www.missourimilitia.com/

Need to bring your own:

1 battle rifle (AR,AK,FN)

200 rds ammunition in mags or stripper clips

(standard caliber .223, .308, 7.62)
Click to expand...

And:

WHO CAN JOIN

You must be between the ages of 18 and 64 per Missouri Title V, never convicted of a felony, never adjudicated mentally deficient, and not a member of a hate group to be eligible to volunteer. Additionally we require a background check prior to becoming a full time volunteer. This must be completed no later than your third training event and costs $15.00 payable to the Missouri Highway Patrol.
Click to expand...
 
I scanned the site for a list of the 23 states that have it in place but didn't see it. I only saw about 14 states listed. I'd like to know if NY is one of them. I'll join.
 
The state can not form a militia as outlined in the 2ed amendment. A militia is of the people not the government. The state can be more oppressive then the feds ever can be. Just look at CA and NY
 
As has already been mentioned, some states, including Virginia, do have such a thing, which I believe is called the state guard or something. It's not exactly like the old British Home Guard but the idea's the same. They're theoretically supposed to guard important things when necessary, basically relieving that responsibility from other military units. There must not be much of a need for them, however, since there doesn't seem to be any form of recruiting going on. If there is, it missed me.

However a good the idea might be, I think a basic problem is rather that few people would want to join, rather than lots. Recruiting is always a problem for the armed forces, both here and elsewhere, especially when there has been a tradition of voluntary military service. That's not only true in the United States but in some other countries as well.

Another basic problem of such an body is that it competes with other elements of the military for recruiting. Some elements of the population would have no interest at all in joining and ultimately, I suspect recruits might be drawn from a relatively small base, which is not necessarily bad, only that the pool of prospects is not unlimited. Of course, that's true of the military in general. You quickly realize that you need young men of a certain age group for your army and at any given time, there are only so many and even some of them wouldn't qualify under the most ordinary of standards. Like it or not, a unit of old men is of limited usefulness (but not quite useless).

Another problem with such units, including old-time militia units in some places, was that the active military sometimes tended to view them as a source of trained men, thereby robbing them of (probably) their best members. Naturally, this presupposes there is a real need for military units in the first place.
 
A few years back, when the State of Wyoming passed their freedom to carry law, several Anti-Gun groups said the law was akin to "making everyone in the State a member of the militia". Many of them were fighting the carry legislation because they didn't want to be in the new "militia"!

Kind of ironic that the anti's were trying to use the militia from both sides of the fence in their arguments!
 
Can a militia buy and use automatic rifles just the same as the military? That would be the legal argument I would want to push.
 
Are members of the Virginia Defense Force armed?

The Code of Virginia states that "members of the Virginia State Defense Force shall not be armed with firearms during the performance of training duty or state active duty, except under circumstances and in instances authorized by the Governor."
Click to expand...

They show up to gun shows and try to recruit.


THE MISSION

The Virginia Defense Force (VDF) is an all-volunteer, formal military organization. Its mission is to assist the Virginia National Guard in performing state missions as specified by the Governor.

The VDF is the state’s only military force that is independent of federal control. With units located throughout the state, the VDF can move into a stricken area quickly, interact with and assist local authorities and restore community integrity as soon as possible. Working during blizzards, hurricanes, tornadoes, and other disasters, the VDF volunteers are familiar faces working in nearby towns and cities bringing aid and comfort to their neighbors.
Click to expand...

Frankly, if they're not going to train as light infantry, then they're really training to be relief workers. I have no interest in that and neither do the few Virginians who are interested in joining a militia.
 
Can a militia buy and use automatic rifles just the same as the military? That would be the legal argument I would want to push.
Click to expand...

The militia can. I think they do in California. You don't get to take it home and play with it of course.
Frankly, if they're not going to train as light infantry, then they're really training to be relief workers.
Click to expand...

Alabama is even worse they are essentially janitors at the armories. And all other militia training is illegal.
 
To any question that starts with "Why don't they", the answer is always "money".

In this case, it's taxpayer money and few states have any to spare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top