States need to start their own volunteer militia's!!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Should states that want to leave the union start their own volunteer militia's?
State funded and equipped with absolutely no federal money involved.. I think the answer is yes.
Each state needs a well funded militia , one that can stand against the federal government!--Tyr

[jafar00]

Should states that want to leave the union start their own volunteer militia's?
State funded and equipped with absolutely no federal money involved.. I think the answer is yes.
Each state needs a well funded militia , one that can stand against the federal government!--Tyr

Great idea Tyr. Bring the "Arab Spring" to the USA.

[logroller]

Many states already have them...of course, they're still under the supreme command of Potus per Article 2, section 2 which states, in part "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; " (emphasis added)

[CSM]

Many states already have them...of course, they're still under the supreme command of Potus per Article 2, section 2 which states, in part "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; " (emphasis added)

Militias, at on point in time in the history of this country, were often funded by private (albeit, wealthy) individuals. They were thus not necessarily aligned with any government at any level. Such an organization today would be viewed with great suspicion, to say the least. There are examples in recent history of how state and federal governments handle private organizations which are a perceived threat (Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc.).

[CSM]

Great idea Tyr. Bring the "Arab Spring" to the USA.

I am skeptical that any Arab/Muslim would be welcomed in such a militia but I could be wrong!

[Gaffer]

Great idea Tyr. Bring the "Arab Spring" to the USA.

They're already here.

http://www.military.com/video/operat.../660940716001/

[CSM]

They're already here.

http://www.military.com/video/operat.../660940716001/

Say it isn't so!

[Gaffer]

Say it isn't so!

It might explain our military training in urban and suburban areas of certain cities.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It might explain our military training in urban and suburban areas of certain cities.

Did you see that they have and train with exsplosives!!?? No religious protection allows for that!!! With no raids on those camps we can see whats coming here soon!! They are training to wreck havoc and take over here when we have a breakdown. Those camps must be destroyed and those people arrested. Yet the opposite will happen , our government will protect them! And people will shrug their shoulders and ignore it.. Citizens must organise to stop this threat because government is a willing ally with the muslims.-Tyr

[CSM]

Well, Obama did say he wanted a civilian force equipped and trained equivalently to the US military. Maybe this is it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

They're already here.

http://www.military.com/video/operat.../660940716001/

As usual the muslims get a pass. Those people in those camps training are training to kill Americans here yet nothing is done. They should ALL -BE ARRESTED OR ELSE KILLED! This isnt a game, those camps are real and are training to kill us. Why hasnt the government raided those camps? Answer because it gives muslims a pass and no other religion. Ask yourself why ...Citizens need to organise a force to destroy those camps!!! The scum in those camps as well.
To all that havent watched the linked video , do so now and remove the blinders our government has applied!-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

They're already here.

http://www.military.com/video/operat.../660940716001/

They have one camp in Texas. Why hasnt the Texas Rangers shut down that camp? The states do not have to wait on federal approval. The federal government is a willing ally thanks to CAIR. At least 8 years of monitoring but no camps shut down! How many thousands have been trained? Allowing that training to go on for at least 8 years is aiding and abetting by any standard IMHO.-Tyr

[fj1200]

Just a bit dense arent ya? Over 8 years of "monitoring " with no action taken against those camps is the evidence !
Funny, how you missed that..-Tyr

I didn't miss it, in fact it's direct evidence against your claim.

They have one camp in Texas. Why hasnt the Texas Rangers shut down that camp? The states do not have to wait on federal approval. The federal government is a willing ally thanks to CAIR. At least 8 years of monitoring but no camps shut down! How many thousands have been trained? Allowing that training to go on for at least 8 years is aiding and abetting by any standard IMHO.-Tyr

Tell us why please, without the conspiratorial ranting though.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I didn't miss it, in fact it's direct evidence against your claim.

Bullshat, it direct proof of the fact our government has taken no action and has allowed hundreds or thousands of radical muslims to be trained to murder!-Tyr

Tell us why please, without the conspiratorial ranting though.

The facts and the video are not ranting. Your silly demand that I present more is whats insane. I am not there investigation,but obvious to anybody that 8 years is far too long to allow this crap and that it is insane to allow that many terrorists to be trained! 8 years and still running, for how many more years and how many more trained terrorist murderers?----Tyr

What you miss is our government has taken far ,far more drastic actions for far , far less reason but here again absolutely refuses to do so when The party is muslims. Its this very special exemption that points to a very grave reality. That our government has allied with them in some manner AND FOR SOME INSANE REASON BE IT OUT OF FEAR OR OTHERWISE IMHO.-Tyr

[logroller]

Training a militia in guerrilla warfare is not against US law.

So now after viewing the video of muslim camps training how to murder security guards, use exsplosives you dare to call those muslim groups-- "militia"--!! Here is a defibition and explaination of militia. -Tyr

MILITIA

The military force of the nation, consisting of citizens called forth to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrection and repel invasion.
The Constitution of the United States provides on this subject as follows: Art. 1, s. 8, 14. Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions.
15. 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.
Under the clauses of the constitution, the following points have been decided.If congress had chosen, they might by law, have considered a militia man, called into the service ot the United States, as being, from the time of such call, constructively in that service, though not actually so, although he should not appear at the place of rendezvous. But they have not so considered him, in the acts of congress, till after his appearance at the place of rendezvous; previous to that, a fine was to be paid for the delinquency in not obeying the call, which fine was deemed an equivalent for his services, and an atonement for disobedience.The militia belong to the states respectively, and are subject, both in their civil and military capacities, to the jurisdiction and laws of the state, except so far as these laws are controlled by acts of congress, constitutionally made.
It is presumable the framers of the constitution contemplated a full exercise of all the powers of organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia; nevertheless, if congress had declined to exercise them, it was competent to the state governments respectively to do it. But congress has executed these powers as fully as was thought right, and covered the whole ground of their legislation by different laws, notwithstanding important provisions may have been omitted, or those enacted might be beneficially altered or enlarged.After this, the states cannot enact or enforce laws on the same subject. For although their laws may not be directly repugnant to those of congress, yet congress, having exercised their will upon the subject, the states cannot legislate upon it. If the law of the latter be the same, it is inoperative; if they differ, they must, in the nature of things, oppose each other, so far as they differ. Thus if an act of congress imposes a fine, and a state law fine and imprisonment for the same offence, though the latter is not repugnant, inasmuch as it agrees with the act of the congress, so far as the latter goes, and add another punishment, yet the wills of the two legislating powers in relation to the subject are different, and cannot subsist harmoniously together. The same legislating power may impose cumulative punishments; but not different legislating powers. Therefore, where the state governments have, by the constitution, a concurrent power with the national government, the former cannot legislate on any subject on which congress has acted, although the two laws are not in terms contradictory and repugnant to each other. Where congress prescribed the punishment to be inflicted on a militia man, detached and called forth, but refusing to march, and also provided that courts martial for the trial of such delinquent's, to be composed of militia officers only, should be held and conducted in the manner pointed out by the rules and articles of war, and a state had passed a law enacting the penalties on such delinquents which the act of congress prescribed, and directing lists of the delinquents to be furnished to the comptroller of the United States and marshal, that further proceeding might take place according to the act of congress, and providing for their trial by state courts martial, such state courts martial have jurisdiction. Congress might have vested exclusive jurisdiction in courts martial to be held according to their laws, but not having done so expressly, their jurisdiction is not exclusive.
Although congress have exercised the whole power of calling out the militia, yet they are not national militia, till employed in actual service; and they are not employed in actual service, till they arrive at the place of rendezvous.

Where did you get that those religious , para-military muslim indoctrination camps are militia, training to defend the respective states or the nation? You seem to like to play fast and loose with words. Those camps are training to defend Islam stupido! Thus they are not militia!!! You thought that you got by with that deceit but I was busy with other things and just now got back to your bullshit reply. Here in USA they arent militia if they are training to defend a religion. No definition of militia speaks of training to fight to defend a religion (Islam). You lie and you are caught at it! You tried to make the scum legit by that lie! -Tyr

I got it from gaffer. Re: Arab spring , as an example an upstart revolutionary militia. Perhaps I mischaracterized his response as genuine.

They're already here.

http://www.military.com/video/operat.../660940716001/

But I didnt say they were legit, i said they werent illegal; and perhoas they arent. so while we're at it. Did you know all legitimate domestic militias answer, ultimately, to the CiC? Else they're not a legitimate militia. Odds are, those Muslim groups wouldnt answer to the call of Congress or the prez, so they're bogus, I'll concede that point to you.

But more fair use violation Tyr. That was a nice passage from http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m110.htm

So, you believe these militias you claim the states need to create, when called into actual duty by Congress and being commanded by the President would be...

... one that can stand against the federal government!--Tyr

Seems a daft POV to take, but one which you wholly embrace.