Re: Kiddie exercises his right to bear arms

"Don Homuth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:21:34 GMT, "Koc77" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >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."  When the constitution was written, all
able
> >bodied males were the militia.
>
> But *not* the Militia -- as described within the Constitution.
>
> That entity is described operationally in Art 1(8)(15-16) and Art
> 2(2)(1).
>
> It never was some rump group just getting together.
>
> It always was for the Congress to arm, train and organize it.  Its
> purposes were three and three only -- and None of them was to foment
> an insurrection, even obliquely.
>
> And that Militia is now the National Guard.
>
> There is no other with a Constitutional basis.

Here are the items Don is referencing.
"To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union,
suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for
governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United
States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the
officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the
discipline prescribed by Congress; "

and

Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of
the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called
into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in
writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon
any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall
have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United
States, except in cases of impeachment.

Don, nothing you've pointed out here counteracts "The right of the people to
keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

While it is Congresses job to provide for the Militia, it is not the same
job as Art 1(8)(12-13) which states:

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall
be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

The only relevent part of Art 2(2)(1) is that the militia is under the
control of the president when they are called into service.  Still doesn't
discount "The right of the people to Keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed."

The Federalist Papers have been used in the past in interpreting the
Constitution in US courts.

Hamilton stated in the Federalist Papers under No. 28

"The militia is a voluntary force not associated or
under the control of the States except when
called out; [when called into actual service] a
permanent or long standing force would
be entirely different in make-up and call."

The National Guard is a permanent standing force, under the direct control
of the President.  They are not a true militia.

Hamilton further stated in the Federalist Papers under No. 69:

"The President, and government, will only control
the militia when a part of them is in the actual
service of the federal government, else, they are
independent and not under the command of the
president or the government. The states would
control the militia, only when called out into the
service of the state, and then the governor would
be commander in chief where enumerated
in the respective state constitution."

http://memory.loc.gov/const/fed/fedpapers.html

-Kevin C.