Officially, a militia is part of the organized armed forces of a country that is called upon only in an emergency. There have been paramilitary groups with revolutionary ideas throughout America’s history, but today’s militia movement is a new more organized and violent presence (Meyers). Today the militia are unofficial citizens’ armies organized by private individuals, usually with antigovernment, far right agendas. They rationalize that the American people need armed force to help defend themselves against an increasingly oppressive government that is becoming part of a global conspiracy called the “New World Order” (Sonder, 2000). These armed groups call themselves militias; to both imply the image of the …show more content…
Militia growth appears to have been steady throughout 1995 and the first half of 1996 (Sonder, 2000).
The primary illegal activities among militia groups are related to weapons and explosives. Militia groups in Virginia, West Virginia, Georgia, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, California, and a number of other states have seen members arrested for possession of illegal weapons and explosives. People in the movement tend to give inflated numbers, in order to make their movement seem larger, and at the same time, because they are so paranoid, will refuse to allow people to actually count their numbers. In addition, groups go in and out of existence all the time, and there are many people who are part of the movement, without being card-carrying members of any one particular group. There are some groups few people know about because they are underground. All these factors together make it impossible to say with any certainty how many militia groups there are. The number of groups is certainly in the hundreds.
The militia movement has many people who could be called law-abiding citizens. However, many members conduct criminal activity (Dees, 1996). The most common is the collection of illegal weapons and explosives. Sometimes these illegal arsenals are stunning in their size. Since militia members tend to believe that they have the right to own whatever sort of weapon they
Back then, the militia was the only form of protection, and it was made up of local citizens. Now though, America has trained authorities whose main job is to protect us, so there is really no need to bear arms.
United States is a country that has problems with gun control, and this issue has many debates between whether or not people should be allowed to carry a gun on them. This free county not only for speech and religion, but also allows people to have the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment of the United States was written by our Founding Fathers,“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” (Government). The main purpose of the Second Amendment when our Founding Fathers wrote this amendment was to help the American citizens to defend themselves from the government at that time, and other countries from invading their properties. However,
Gun control is a very controversial issue among society at present. Many feel guns are the cause of a great amount of crime. This has been an especially popular topic recently in lieu of the shooting at Columbine and other high schools across the country. Are these crimes reason to take away our freedom to bear arms? I do not believe so. The average person uses guns mainly as a means of protection. If limitations are placed on guns, they will only stop the average American from obtaining a gun. The real criminals out there will still be able to obtain guns through the black market. Every American should have the right to protect them self.
A well regulated Militia, composed of the body of the people trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state
Although many may argue that it is our Constitutional right to bear arms which therefore cannot be infringed upon, ultimately this statement holds a fallacy in that the Second Amendment within the Bill of Rights states, “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.” A militia, by definition, is a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency. There is no statement within the Second Amendment holding the fact that any civilian, licensed or not licensed to carry, cannot have this right revoked in any daily life situation. The Second Amendment clearly states that only when necessary in emergence may a well regulated militia hold the right to bear arms. Are we, as citizens of the United States holding this fallacy because we believe we need such power, or do we hold such power because we believe this fallacy.
The Second Amendment states that “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”.1 It is important to understand that the Second Amendment was created in order to allow the American people to form militias in response to a tyrannical government attempting to suppress the American way of life. In order for Americans to form militias, they must uphold their freedom to bear arms as a
The second amendment of the Constitution states -“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.” (Constitution, Amendment 2). There is much debate as to whether the Amendment refers to individuals having the right to bear arms or that we are entitled to have an army (militia) that is ready at moments notice to fight for our country. Both interpretations are technically correct as they are present in the Amendment. Every state had a National Guard that is readily available in case of disaster or war. This goes without mentioning our military that are also ready and waiting. Everyone shares in the protection
“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.” In our political climate today, there is an ongoing debate on the meaning of the second amendment. In particular, much controversy centers upon whether we should make gun control laws more strict like the laws in DC, or if we should make laws to encourage and embrace American citizens to own firearms and carry them in public, similar to laws in Vermont. In fact, some citizens wonder why we even have the second amendment in the first place.
The militia is all male bodies of the United States that are at least the age of 17. They are a group of armed citizens that enter the military service in time of need. They are called out from time to time but are used full time only for emergencies. They could refer to the National Guard.
“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear
Expanding upon the wording in the 2nd Amendment, anti-gun control proponents argue that the definition of “militia” is not limited to an armed force under direct control of the state or federal government. Charles Heston, president of the NRA, cites US Code Title 10, Section 311, stating that the recognized legal definition of militia is that “the ‘militia’ is made up of two complementary bodies: the ‘organized militia,’ which is the National Guard; and the ‘unorganized militia,’ which is every male citizen between ages 17 and 45” (Heston). Under this expanded definition of militia, every legal male of the accepted age has the right to bear arms under United States law. Some gun rights advocates further expand this right to be
The first half of the 2nd Amendment states that “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”. This was put in place to ensure that the government or
"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." These are the words of the second amendment in the United States Constitution. The amendments guarantee america citizens the right to bear arms. This right grants men have the right to bear arms their for protection or for the militia they were served in. This amendment today should grant all civilians to own guns.
The continuing Mass Shootings in the United States has caused the gun control debate to intensify. While anti-gun control advocates say the Second Amendment guarantees each individual the right to bear arms, the pro-gun control group reads the Second Amendment as a collective right to bear arms; meaning organized militia are the only ones with that right. This essay will analyse the effectiveness of several different articles which present arguments for and against gun control.
As far as overall gun violence is concerned, according to the FBI's 1998 Uniform Crime Reports, the overall violent crime rate in the US decreased about 7%. Robbery alone declined by 11%, the lowest since 1969. In addition, murder dropped by 7%, the lowest since 1967. More significantly, despite the fact the number of firearms and handguns owned by individual Americans continued to increase from 1997-1998, the FBI also reported the rate of firearms used to commit murder and robberies decreased in 1998. (1998 Uniform Crime Reports). These facts conclusively prove that firearms owned by peaceable citizens do not lead to increased murder or violent crime rates. In fact, they demonstrate that armed citizens lead to reduced rates of violent crime. When the gun is in the hands of a well-rounded person, it is no more of a weapon than your every day curling iron.