testtest

Second Amendment: Understanding The Militia Clause

Talyn

SAINT
Founding Member
When Americans debate the Second Amendment, most of the focus tends to center around the individual right to keep and bear arms. This emphasis, especially in post-Heller and McDonald jurisprudence, is both understandable and historically justified.

However, a recurring error—committed even by Second Amendment advocates—is to treat the “militia clause” as a relic or a throwaway preamble. This oversight is more than a mere historical misstep; it’s a strategic blunder that endangers the very right these advocates claim to protect.


1751938442428.png
 
The biggest problem that I have with this article is it keeps dismissing the militia like it's not something that exists anymore.

Alaska has an Active State Militia that participated in the Battles of Attu and Dutch Harbour.
California, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia all have active state militias that are answerable only to the state and Texas for sure cannot be federalised.
 
Back
Top