I've Been Accused of being Liberal. Okay I'm laying my cards on the table

Sandman said

Where did you read that the militia mentioned is one formed to resist the U.S. Government? Way off base. Let's look at what is actually written:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Nothing in there about resisting the U.S. government. Rather the militia is mentioned to help with the security of the state...actually it says it is "necessary" for the security of the state. This directly contradicts what you just wrote.

Click to expand...

Historically speaking, it gets real dicey. The historical precedent of this part of the constituion raises the question of which is superior, a state militia, or national army?

In 1786/1794, state militias rebelled against national goverment policy. In the latter they were put down by a nationl army.

Section two of the Constitution gives the president power, or commanding power of a national army, which is never mentioned in the Constituton--state militias are legitimate "when called into national service"--which is ultimately dicey, since the legislature is the official body of gov't which declares war.