During the Clinton years, the “dangerous right wing militia” was all over the news. Once Bush was elected, they seemed to vanish from the press. Now that Obama is President, they seem to have come roaring back. How much of this is due to the militias actually evaporating during the Bush years, and how much of it is due to the more extreme stories of whackjob militiamen being useful to the left-leaning press during Democratic Presidential administrations, I’ll leave as an exercise for the student.
Either way, the press is going to start running story upon story of “dangerous right-wing militia groups.” So I think it’s important for people to know how to spot a militia member. Let’s face it, you wouldn’t want such dangerous folk to go walking about without some sort of way to recognize them. So, let’s see how Title 10 of the U.S. Code defines “militia:”
§ 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
So, there ya go. Every able-bodied man between the ages of 17 and 45 is a militiaman.
Go forth and panic in the streets.
18 Responses to “How to spot a militia member”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The Militia never went anywhere, we been right here the whole time. Doing what we always do, why does that make leftards piss themselves in terror? What about American citizens fulfilling our Constitutional duties and exercising our Constitutional rights is so terrifying for all these anti-American a$$holes?
[…] From the Unwanted Blog. […]
Heh.
> why does that make leftards piss themselves in terror?
For the most part it doesn’t. Like it or not, if the US Government went full-bore tyrannical and the military went along with it, the militia’d have a hell of a time making much of a difference. Look at Iraq: the insurgents tried as hard as they could and the US military was pretty hamstrung… and the insurgents still couldn;t accomplish dick.
But the “dangerous right wing militia” is a hell of a useful club for ’em in the press. These Hutaree nutjobs seem to have been pretty useless; their plans would have al;most certainly fallen apart the moment they hit the street. This is not new… there have been similar incidents with groups of Muslims here in the US who talked big about wanting to blow up stuff like the Sears Tower, yet were far too incompetant to even set off a smoke alarm. but while the Muslim equivalents for a few seconds worth of press and then vanished, these Hutaree are Big News.
If they are found guilty of attempting to murder cops and others, they should be hung from the gibbets for the sport of the crows. But then… so should *everyone* who has been found guilty of attempting murder of *anyone.* But nobody should be under the delusion that these guys are representative of much of anyone. But that won’t stop the press or the DNC… expect the Hutaree to be the new “face of the Tea Party/Republicans/right wing/anyone to the right of Stalin.”
The publicity over militias is another fear tactic. The Libtards are trying to use fear of these groups to tighten the reins. Everything from gun control, free speech restrictions, to illegal searches will be fair game to them.
“For the most part it doesn’t. Like it or not, if the US Government went full-bore tyrannical and the military went along with it, the militia’d have a hell of a time making much of a difference. ”
One of the only things that truly reassures me about our government today is that I still think the chances of the military actually going along with full-bore tyranny are effectively nil. What do you guys think about the possibility?
[…] Militia, they are all over!! 1 04 2010 Found at The Unwanted Blog […]
“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”
Yamoto.
Will not happen.
If it does, dig a deep hole and pull it in behind you.
Damn, I’m glad we got that cleared up. I have learned that I’m over the age limit. Thanks.
We are everywhere.
Whatever became of the “Naval Militia”? Coast Guard?
You are walking a slippery slope here, in that militias are supposed to be under some form of organized governmental authority that can mobilize them and tell them what to do in times of emergency.
Traditionally, that’s the governor of the state, although I imagine you could argue that a mayor of a city could mobilize militia members in that city if needed, something like a volunteer fire department.
But be careful about saying all US male citizens between the ages of 17 and 45 are members of some sort of giant US militia, because that could well mean the President could mobilize them all, and they would be legally required to obey his orders…do you really want that?
That’s where the term “well regulated militia” comes into play in the second amendment; if a bunch of citizens get together and call themselves a militia, but are answerable to no one except themselves in regard to their actions, nor will obey any sort of governmental authority over themselves, they aren’t a militia, they are a vigilante group or a posse that isn’t under control of a Sheriff, nor been deputized by one.
I might as well get a whole bunch of skydivers together, arm them with AR-15s, and declare them to be the 1st Airborne Division of the North Dakota National Guard.
Although the skydivers might think that was fun, unless the governor had some say over their actions, I doubt either he or the regular National Guard would be much taken with the concept. 😀
> in that militias are supposed to be under some form of organized governmental authority that can mobilize them and tell them what to do in times of emergency.
Yes?
> I imagine you could argue that a mayor of a city could mobilize militia members in that city if needed, something like a volunteer fire department.
Mayors have done just that.
> be careful about saying all US male citizens between the ages of 17 and 45 are members of some sort of giant US militia
I didn’t say it. US Federal law says it.
> if a bunch of citizens get together and call themselves a militia, but are answerable to no one except themselves in regard to their actions, nor will obey any sort of governmental authority over themselves, they aren’t a militia…
Yes, they are. They may not be an “organized militia,” but a militia they remain. They are legally classed as an “unorganized militia” under US law.
> that could well mean the President could mobilize them all, and they would be legally required to obey his orders…
That could well mean, yes. And under the right sort of emergency – an invasion, say, or massive natural disasters, pandemic, zombie apocolypse, whatever – he might get some traction. But if the President tried using that power unwisely – for political purposes, frex – the militia might well decide that the orders are illegal and that it was time to replace the President.
It’s a dangerous thing to call up vast numbers and put them under arms… especially if you’re not sure which way they’ll point their guns.
The Wikipedia article on the history of militias in the US describes State Defense Forces, which can do the duties normally done by the National Guard of the state if they are called off to war, or add to their strength if an emergency is severe enough that the National Guard can’t handle it all on their own:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_%28United_States%29#State_Defense_Forces
…as well as perform ceremonial functions.
Problem here is chain of command and rank.
As all male citizens between ages 17 and 45 are members of the militia, who decides who can order who around? They are all effectively of the same rank. Any decision about some members having the ability to command others of the militia has to come from a authority superior to the militia members themselves, and link them into a chain of command of some sort.
Also, if the militia is to be called up, it means that some sort of means has to be found to know who they are, how to get in contact with them, and who they will be commanded by if called up.
The “militia movement” is loath to have anyone in government know who they are, how they are organized, where they may be, or what activities they are engaged in as part of their militia training – making them pretty much worthless for any sort of organized activity if an emergency should arise where their help was needed.
They want to be a militia, fine.
Let them be officially organized and recognized by a state’s civil government as such, have leaders appointed by a entity other than themselves (or at least voted upon by all members in such a organized militia rather than the self-appointed Napoleon of the week method) and a means of getting in contact with them 24/7 if needed, like a volunteer fire department has.
Meetings should be publicly announced beforehand and open to the public, as the militia is their to serve and protect the public welfare, and not advance their own political agendas by force. In fact, having all meetings be open to the public would be a great way to get new recruits for such volunteer militias, by showing that they are a respectable and respected organization which many may desire to belong.
If it becomes time to replace the president for giving unconstitutional orders, that can be handled a lot more safely via articles of impeachment than letting the Freikorps storm the White House, because as soon as the president is gone there will be a giant power struggle to put someone else in charge that won’t be governed by the Constitution or the Bill Of Rights, and historically whoever ends up on top once that is over tends to be a complete tyrant, and any pretense of democracy quickly vanishes.
> Let them be officially organized and recognized by a state’s civil government as such, have leaders appointed by a entity other than themselves
Ah, no. So long as people are not breaking the law and/or threatening or harming other… let them do as they like.
One might be forgiven for considering that the definition of “militia” offers the government a chance to call them up — all of them in a certain area or who fit some special profile — and sequester them on a reservation while being “processed” or “trained.”
Another aspect of “militia” is the unarmed folk. A volunteer rescue squad might be a militia of sorts.
Well, things are getting interesting now.
The Guardians Of The Free Republics have just told over thirty governors they have three days to resign.
Coincidence about the three days and Jesus rising from the dead?
Okay, so who are The Guardians Of The Free Republics?
They are from Texas, and somehow that doesn’t surprise me:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/127780
That they are tied to Ron Paul does surprise me, and I’ll bet he is having an interesting time tonight to put it mildly 🙂
It reminds me of that scene in Life Of Brian where the Jewish rebel group gives Pontius Pilate two days to dismantle the entire apparatus of the Roman Imperialist State. 😉
Here’s their website BTW: http://www.gotfr.org/
Apparently their plan is a coup du jour.
Like all of these semi-anarchy government websites, they try to use as obtuse of language as possible to make things look more impressive.
This is as much fun to read as when the nearby town of Medina fell under the control of the Posse Comitatus in 1983 and started promulgating becoming a separate country based on the laws of William The Conqueror and what sounded a lot like a economic system based on something out of Dungeons and Dragons – with everyone getting an equal amount of “Weregeld” on the foundation of the place, and having the right to temporarily enslave people who owed them money.