Militia = Legal & Prudent, Why Hide?

[ronpaulhawaii]

...

Yep. I am suggesting that it's time to dust off and mainstream the oh-so-legal and oh-so-prudent concept of Unorganized Militia.

My understanding is that the National Guard constitutes Organized Militia.

The National Guard has been labeled that, but is far from it, and drifting further.

Vieira really is the expert on these matters. Here are some more random quotes;

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The fundamental operational principle of the constitutional Militia is that everyone who is physically able is required to be armed--with his own personal military-grade firearm, ammunition, and necessary accoutrements in his own possession at home--and ready to repel invasions, suppress rebellions and insurrections, and enforce the laws, especially against usurpation and tyranny. http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin15.htm [/FONT]

The answer is, of course, “the Militia of the several States.” Not the disorganized, unarmed, outdated, and thoroughly useless “militia,” merely incidental to the Second Amendment, that appear, almost by way of caricature, in Justice Scalia’s muddled majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller; but instead the real constitutional Militia that the Amendment declares to be “necessary to the security of a free State”—a level of importance the Constitution ascribes to no other institution, including Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, and the Army and Navy. http://gunnyg.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/awaiting-obama’s-call-by-dr-edwin-vieira-jr-phd-jd/

and from this week;

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Why not revitalize “the Militia of the several States”, which the Constitution declares to be “necessary to the security of a free State”—and never more necessary than right now? Why not, indeed? What else can America do that could be more important for her survival as “a free State”? If someone can propose any other course of action capable of mobilizing tens of millions of Americans for collective action with full constitutional authority, and outside of the phoney “two” political parties and the Establishment’s other political control-mechanisms, please speak up now, or forever hold your peace. Because time is fast running out, even as you read these words. http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin192.htm[/FONT]

 

[Kalifornia]

cheapseats is the new ghemminger.

 

[cheapseats]

cheapseats is the new ghemminger.

In light of the proactively adversarial role you assumed in the Resist thread, as herein evidenced,

half the posters in this thread remind me why I left the libertarian party...

I will suggest the logical inference that you intended the comparison of me to ghemminger, a board member with whom I am unfamiliar, as an insult.

Counselor Wannabe (pretend it's a test question), explain and defend a reference that you have "publicly" drawn between two people whose names are not in the public domain and who were not present when you announced the reference.

 

[cheapseats]

cheapseats this is a good post.

I have never had a problem with seeing any in military uniforms acting with those they defend. I truthfully think there should be more to it. I often see military and I always make a point of approaching and giving a heartfelt thank you. I guess maybe that is because I have served.

I USED to, in the airports. At baggage claim in Atlanta, a column of them were trooping by and I began to clap and so did someone else and then so did everyone else, until the last soldier went by. Between you me, it was kinda like one of those trains that turn out to be longer than you thought when you vowed to count the cars, but everyone let the bags go round and round and kept right on clapping. It was beautiful.

But, correct me if I'm wrong, they're not supposed to wear their uniforms when they travel anymore. Perhaps to keep the Citizen Spenders relaxed and confident? Nuthin' throws a damper on tourism like terrorist attacks.

Now that I am more aware of..well many things, I also get into a discussion with them.

I intro talking about boot camp and how much that experience had changed me. Then I will guide the conversation to the common oath that they and I share. "To uphold and defend the Constitution" and what it means. Then I steer them towards lawful and unlawful order discussions.

I remind them that each and every civilian is their or their squadmates mother, brother, sister etc.

The point of boot camp was to de-humanize the "enemy". I make it a point to reestablish that no citizen of the U.S. should be considered an "enemy" by those that serve in the military and are sworn to defend and uphold the Constitution.

Understood, but having served makes a big difference.

Now that I am more aware of...well, many things, I am more intimidated by American Military and Law Enforcement. Scared is not too strong a word.

Living in fear is for shit. It just ruins everything.

Who could be less fearful than citizens who know that, when push comes to shove, they can give as good as they get. Who could grow up more carefree than children who know that all those people who are dwarfing over them are johnny-on-the-spot whenever something happens. Ready, Willing & Able = FanTAStic sense of well-being.

Well-being is contagious, good or bad.

 

[Kalifornia]

In light of the proactively adversarial role you assumed in the Resist thread, as herein evidenced,
I will suggest the logical inference that you intended the comparison of me to ghemminger, a board member with whom I am unfamiliar, as an insult.

Counselor Wannabe (pretend it's a test question), explain and defend a reference that you have "publicly" drawn between two people whose names are not in the public domain and who were not present when you announced the reference.

I dont need to 'explain and defend' anything, but as a personal favor, I will answer your question.

Its not an insult so much as it is a comparison of style. Don't bother getting your panties in a bunch. Im expressing an opinion which does not imply that you are in any way immoral or an unclean person, so your reputation is safe. Plus, truth is a defense, you are in many ways like our friend Ghemminger.

Ghemmiger is a fellow who posted somewhat randomly and in a manner that failed to show its logic to many of the other posters. I rather liked him, but he got annoying from time to time, and eventually he was drummed off the forum for being a 'troll'. (not in any way my doing, as I said, I rather liked him, and he was more funny than annoying). He is back now, but rarely posts, mostly because he has found a calling on youtube.

Unfortunately, you arent exactly like Ghemminger. While many of your posts make little to no sense, you arent really funny... So I find you mostly annoying. And some other posters consider you to be a troll. Its nothing personal, I dont know you well enough to actively dislike you, but your style grates my nerves. I could do with less of your babbling.

 

[cheapseats]

America is spending FORTUNES on "free" diabetes supplies. Obesity is RAMPANT. If an emergency requires that people hustle, we have a ridiculous number of people who CAN'T.

Riflery, marksmanship, archery, survival skillz, these seem like naturals for the perennial Presidential Fitness Challenge. Naturals for high school P.E., too. I know Libertarians don't approve of public education but, me, I'm crazy about an educated public.

Equipment sales will SOAR. Equipment sales beget OTHER purchases, everyone knows the drill. That's whatcha call Economic Stimulus. Better that a country which is in a depression and a four-front war should have more weapons than more gas-reliant automobiles.

 

[cheapseats]

I dont need to 'explain and defend' anything

When you speak anonymously, no you don't. When you start spouting off under your real name, yes you will.

but as a personal favor, I will answer your question.

You can disabuse yourself of the notion that you have done me any favors.

Its not an insult so much as it is a comparison of style. Don't bother getting your panties in a bunch. Im expressing an opinion which does not imply that you are in any way immoral or an unclean person, so your reputation is safe.

Implication that one is "immoral or unclean" is not the only grounds on which a reputation may be slandered. But then, presumably you know that.

Plus, truth is a defense, you are in many ways like our friend Ghemminger.

Gossip is gossip.

Ghemmiger is a fellow who posted somewhat randomly and in a manner that failed to show its logic to many of the other posters. I rather liked him, but he got annoying from time to time, and eventually he was drummed off the forum for being a 'troll'. (not in any way my doing, as I said, I rather liked him, and he was more funny than annoying). He is back now, but rarely posts, mostly because he has found a calling on youtube.

Unfortunately, you arent exactly like Ghemminger.

Is this, like, high school -- that you feel compelled to chronicle and opine on the posting histories and styles of others? It REEKS of the time-honored criticizing others to inflate self.

While many of your posts make little to no sense, you arent really funny...

Others disagree. I get it, that you can't please all the people all the time. What I DON'T get, is the sophomoric and kinda girlie need to announce your FEELINGS.

So I find you mostly annoying.

See above.

And some other posters consider you to be a troll.

Yes, I know that Doktor-with-a-k_Jeep leveled that serious charge at me . . . AFTER I SEVERAL TIMES ASKED HIM POINT-BLANK QUESTIONS.

Its nothing personal,

False.

I dont know you well enough to actively dislike you,

That's true. One might say that you are loyal to a fault.

but your style grates my nerves. I could do with less of your babbling.

See above regarding your need to announce your FEELINGS. Would it not be more efficient, more effective and more manly to simply NOT READ my "babblings" than to provoke me with backbiting?

 

[Kalifornia]

When you speak anonymously, no you don't. When you start spouting off under your real name, yes you will.
You can disabuse yourself of the notion that you have done me any favors.

Calm down beavis. Consider this a friendly intervention.

Implication that one is "immoral or unclean" is not the only grounds on which a reputation may be slandered. But then, presumably you know that.

You really should spend more time understanding what you accuse people of. Im not going to bother explaining in detail the point where expressing an opinion about someone becomes defamation. Just know we havent gotten there. If you think I am rude sobe it. Rude isnt the standard.

Gossip is gossip.

yes it is. It also isnt this.

Is this, like, high school -- that you feel compelled to chronicle and opine on the posting histories and styles of others? It REEKS of the time-honored criticizing others to inflate self.

Others disagree. I get it, that you can't please all the people all the time. What I DON'T get, is the sophomoric and kinda girlie need to announce your FEELINGS.

Im not interested in inflating my ego, such much as I am interested in not being exposed to your inane banter.

Yes, I know that Doktor-with-a-k_Jeep leveled that serious charge at me . . . AFTER I SEVERAL TIMES ASKED HIM POINT-BLAND QUESTIONS THAT HE IGNORED.

The only reason I care about your interaction with Jeep is that it causes me to have to read more of your babbling. If we can get him to quit responding to you, will you promise to cut your posting a bit? Itd be good if I could read a whole page of posts without half of them being you.

Liar. That's true. One might say that you are loyal to a fault.

No, the reason we are having this discussion is that I am honest to a fault.

See above regarding your need to announce your FEELINGS. Would it not be more efficient, more effective and more manly to simply NOT READ my "babblings" than to provoke me with backbiting?

If it were only so simple. Perhaps if I didnt have spend 30 seconds per page scrolling past your inane babbling, it would be easier to avoid it.

 

[cheapseats]

Im not interested in inflating my ego,

Good one, Counselor.

such much as I am interested in not being exposed to your inane banter.

How 'bout some regulations to go with your protectionism?

The only reason I care about your interaction with Jeep is that it causes me to have to read more of your babbling.

Victim.

If we can get him to quit responding to you, will you promise to cut your posting a bit?

What is this, fuckin' Romper Room?

Itd be good if I could read a whole page of posts without half of them being you.

I have heard tell of an Ignore feature.

No, the reason we are having this discussion is that I am honest to a fault.

Good one, Counselor.

If it were only so simple. Perhaps if I didnt have spend 30 seconds per page scrolling past your inane babbling, it would be easier to avoid it.

I cannot imagine anything easier than ignoring a thread BEGUN by someone who annoys you.

 

[Kalifornia]

Good one, Counselor.

I know.

How 'bout some regulations to go with your protectionism?

Protectionism isnt always bad.

Victim.

Look, we agree on something.

What is this, fuckin' Romper Room?

so long as you keep babbling....

I have heard tell of an Ignore feature.

Please instruct me how to find it. It would solve both our problems.

Good one, Counselor.

full circle.

I cannot imagine anything easier than ignoring a thread BEGUN by someone who annoys you.

Got me there. I dont generally read who starts the threads, but Im certainly willing to do so.

I think the ignore feature is a fine idea. Where is it?

Edit: Nevermind, I found it. Sweet relief.

 

[cheapseats]

I cannot imagine anything easier than ignoring a thread BEGUN by someone who annoys you.

Which leads me to wonder WHY Kalifornia-with-a-k . . . who, because he is "honest to a fault," has divulged that I REALLY annoy him . . . is carrying on about his delicate message board sensibilities in a thread about making the Unorganized Militia MORE visible, and MORE accessible and MORE popular.

Is it possible that the substitute-k-for-c faction doesn't WANT regular ol' suburbanites rolling up for target practice? Is it possible that an element of the Unorganized Militia LIKES the cloak-and-dagger elitism?

 

[Kalifornia]

Which leads me to wonder WHY Kalifornia-with-a-k . . . who, because he is "honest to a fault," has divulged that I REALLY annoy him . . . is carrying on about his delicate message board sensibilities in a thread about making the Unorganized Militia MORE visible, and MORE accessible and MORE popular.

Is it possible that the substitute-k-for-c faction doesn't WANT regular ol' suburbanites rolling up for target practice? Is it possible that an element of the Unorganized Militia LIKES the cloak-and-dagger elitism?

First, thanks for being relatively concise. That helps. I whined in this thread because the subject actually interests me, and I couldnt wade through it because many of your posts are indecipherable. In the future, Ill just ignore your threads.

But since Im here, Ill answer your question.

I dont like the idea of 'militias' being more visible, more accessible, and more popular because they are nothing but huge targets, and opportunities for whackjobs to put themselves in the public eye, to provide the mainstream media an opportunity to discredit the liberty movement.

I'ts funny that you think Im some kind of militia nut - I havent ever been and likely never will be, because I think the 'militia' image is just fraught with too many PR problems.

I do think that ALL liberty minded individuals should do what they can to be ready for anything though. That includes owning weapons, provisions, and gear. It also means getting the training necessary to put those tools to use defending yourself, your family,and your local society if the need ever arises. It also means getting out and meeting like minded people, and maybe even going out in the woods and practicing working in small groups on an informal basis.

The problem with large formal groups is that they create opportunities for bad intentioned government people to infiltrate them, and turn normally civil and peaceful people into talk about violence. Once that happens, its astounding how easy it is to snag innocent people into a 'conspiracy' or a RICO charge. Even if the charges are blatantly false, you can ruin someones life rather easily. Thats more hassle than I need.

So Ill stick to doing my thing in the political arena, and working on my personal merit badges, and just going hunting or shooting with friends. You guys can have your 'militia'. I see a reason for it, but its not for me.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]We seem to be having two conversations here. One seems centered on the wisdom of an armed population that has little bearing on the "militia" issue in the title of this thread.The "un-organized" militia is all the people. [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]A group of people that meet, and train, can be considered "organized", [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]([/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]but without the trust, [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]and backing, of the general population, they will be easy targets for smear jobs that affect the entire liberty movement).
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]http://newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin187.htm
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]...
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]All this, of course, is not a matter solely of constitutional theory. The Constitution incorporates the Militia into its federal system because the Founding Fathers were familiar with the Militia’s practical indispensability in many “homeland-security” capacities. Today, the Militia have the opportunity to demonstrate their usefulness in more areas than ever before. For example—[/FONT]​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Fully revitalized Militia will provide literally millions of individuals to patrol streets, malls, public places and buildings, and sensitive private businesses—thus maximizing deterrence against both terrorists and common criminals.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Because the Militia are composed of every adult in the community, their revitalization will result in ferreting out every illegal alien who makes his presence known to anyone in any community.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The Militia will stress Local preparedness, independence, and self-reliance in every form, from providing an inventory of the work necessary to repair and upgrade crumbling infrastructure; to securing supplies of food, fuel, medicines, and other critical materials adequate for any emergency; to developing systems of production, distribution, and consumption that the people themselves control, secure from manipulations by outside speculators; to putting into use an alternative constitutional and economically sound monetary system that will protect common Americans from the inevitable and unavoidable collapse of the Federal Reserve System.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]With the Militia monitoring polling places and verifying and counting paper ballots, the present-day scourge of voting fraud will end.[/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Because all elected public officials, police, and bureaucrats will be members of the Militia (albeit exempted from performing most normal Militia duties while serving in those positions), and therefore will be subject to investigation by the Militia for whatever infractions of the law may be credibly alleged against them, political corruption, police brutality, and “the insolence of office” so widespread, entrenched, and uncontrollable today will receive swift, sure, and severe exposure and punishment. And,[/FONT]​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]When young adults, through Militia discipline and training, recognize that they are being prepared to direct their country’s future under their own authority and in their own interest—when they understand the personal as well as the public purpose and benefit of and from patriotism—then the level of aimlessness, dissipation, drug use, and gang violence so prevalent among today’s youth will shrink into insignificance.[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Regrettably, this picture of real social progress and “change we can believe in” because common Americans would themselves cause it to happen is at present no more than visionary. Although the Constitution requires that all able-bodied adult Americans (not subject to exclusion for some constitutionally acceptable reason) be organized in some manner in “the Militia of the several States,” Congress and the States’ legislatures have consigned the vast majority of Americans to the oxymoronic “unorganized militia.” Although the Constitution requires that all members of the Militia (other than conscientious objectors) possess firearms equivalent in firepower to those carried by at least light-infantry units in the Armed Forces, Congress has enacted statutes (in which the States acquiesce) that make it very difficult if not impossible for average Americans to acquire such firearms—and the Supreme Court in the recent Heller case has endorsed this situation (albeit only in dicta), even while pretending to uphold “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms.”...[/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]

www.committeesofsafety.org
[/FONT]

 

[Pericles]

At the risk of bringing this thread back on topic. Dr. Vieira is the Bomb - the next serious 2A case needs him on our side.

There seem to be two strong feelings in the militia - be underground or be public.

The underground folks see the primary threat to the militia and freedom as tyranny and tend toward a resistance strategy of any number of patriots operating in small detachments in a primarily urban environment doing an "Iraq" on an oppressive regime. I'm thinking that unless there are at least 100,000 to maybe 1 mil of these "detachments" the effect will be about the same level of irritation as street gangs. These folks tend to be opposed to open units that are recognizable because such units could not win in close combat with an active duty military.

The public persona militia types tend to see the breakdown of public order as the most likely case, and the collective government entities will be unable to keep order. in this case, having a public recognition of the militia is seen as a means to build confidence in the public mind, of the militia to operate for the public good. This bond with the public provides the basis for the moral authority to maintain order and also serve the cause of liberty.

As a practical matter, a resistance model is negative - it operate to neutralize a threat, without being part of an alternative that is needed to get public support. The public model means a type of limbo, as it will be the rare government entity that will recognize a public militia as anything other than a private group of yahoos.

I personally favor the public model, but I realize its limitations.

 

[cheapseats]

We seem to be having two conversations here.

At the risk of bringing this thread back on topic.

I REALLY hope that there are, as I think there are, people who are closely following this conversation.

Those who think I am incoherently formulating overly long posts comprised mainly of gibberish have been represented by an audible few, thank you for sharing. I can't vouch for Kalifornia-with-a-k's honesty, but I can vouch for mine. A Liar I am NOT. If you don't get me or don't dig me, there is PLENTY of work to be done without you taking time out of our busy and bullshit-ridden days to take pot shots at me.

We have and we have NOT been having two conversations.

Broaching the subject of a more conspicuous, more run-of-the-mill, more apparent, more present, more EFFECTIVE Militia draws contemptuous response from some, as you can see. I'm a newcomer at this. Saving America was not amongst my retirement plans. There are some among the Rough & Ready who, I respectfully suggest, RESENT the arrival of newbies, wannabes, flatfeet, greenhorns, rookies, dopes, imbecilies, et al.

Here and there, one catches strong enough whiffs of johnny-come-latelies-suck cologne and eau de we-are-so-much-better-than-those-morons that yer average WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON HERE Baby Boomer can't tell whether traditional Law Enforcement and Entrenched Politicians ARE or ARE NOT their better bet for personal safety.

Sad as it is, it MUST be clear that most Americans give a much bigger shit about the safety of self, family and stuff than they do about Liberty or Justice.

 

[cheapseats]

At baggage claim in Atlanta, a column of them were trooping by and I began to clap and so did someone else and then so did everyone else, until the last soldier went by. Between you me, it was kinda like one of those trains that turn out to be longer than you thought when you vowed to count the cars, but everyone let the bags go round and round and kept right on clapping. It was beautiful.

But, correct me if I'm wrong, they're not supposed to wear their uniforms when they travel anymore. Perhaps to keep the Citizen Spenders relaxed and confident? Nuthin' throws a damper on tourism like terrorist attacks.

A few weekends ago, I drove through this demonstration on Wilshire Blvd=lifeblood of Los Angeles. Many many demonstrations have occurred at the Federal Building in Westwood over the many many years that I have lived here. This was different. The people -- Israeli flags on one side and Palestinian flags on the other -- were squared off over eight lanes of traffic all the way from Veteran to Sepulveda, the length of the Veteran's Cemetery opposite the Federal Building.

Because I have lived here for so long, and because I dropped my son at Jackie Robinson Stadium for two summers in a row, I knew how to cut through the Veteran's Administration and weave my way back. I thought I'd take a second pass . . . until I saw the L.A.P.D. black and white IN THE BUSHES, by Jackie Robinson Stadium. Maybe they were there to catch speeders, on an obscure off-street road with multiple speed bumps? One was writing on a clip board. Probably homework.

Traffic control was not permitting cars from the West to proceed through the demonstration but, rather, to turn right/South on Sepulveda and then left on Ohio to Veteran for Northbound through traffic only. Only East of Westwood Blvd could access be again gained to Wilshire for purpose of driving through the demonstration a second time. Which I didn't do, on account of the police in the bushes with the clipboard and on account of I had already been a shit disturber on my first pass.

The reason that they WOULD let Westbound Wilshire traffic through (coming from the East read that Beverly Hills) is so that privileged and sassy rich people do not start looking up from their expensive luncheons to inquire whether perhaps there IS something rotten in our own state of Denmark

Which is the LONG way of harkening back to the Atlanta Airport and the contagious clapping. Which is it, the scenic route or abrupt bullet points? I've been publicly called out and criticized for both.

It is NOT common for Palestinian flags to be jutting out of sunroofs in Westwood. I went to UCLA a million years ago -- when Hari Krishnas danced in front of Bank of America -- and I've lived in L.A. for another quarter-century. Nope, NEVER seen that before.

On the approach, obviously, I was taking pictures (while stopped at a red light, with my seat belt on). Green=go=choice: photos or honk. Isolated honks had prompted the thought. So I pressed on the horn and kept it pressed, the entire block and so did I'm sure not everyone but it SOUNDED like everyone. A gathering and lingering siren of objection: ENOUGH.

If one person had thrown a rock, others would have followed suit.

If a FIRECRACKER had gone off at the Inauguration, it would have been PANDEMONIUM.

For all practical purposes, the American People are sitting ducks and it could not BE more obvious that our Leaders' chief concerns are their own political careers. In my considered opinion, the People MUST find their solidarity and their backbone. As it is, EVERY DAY . . . just like under Bush, there is more damage to be undone.

A scorned woman at State and an Israeli firebrand at Chief of Staff? Are we kidding me?

 

[cheapseats]

There is opportunity in every calamity - I don't make the rules. American Politicos and Robber Barons are trading on Fear. The Climate Of Fear that our leadership is promoting MUST be distinguished from legitimate threat.

From where I sit, the attitude and actions of American Leadership overwhelmingly point to a BOON for gun sales, gun clubs, survivalist organizations and Militia.

Joe Biden announced from the safety of his Secret Service Zone that we should brace ourselves for an "uptick" in casualties. An uptick in casualties in a war in which kinda Christian America is engaged demands that the adult population not otherwise actively serving the war effort shall experience a parallel uptick in responsibilities and obligations. Anything less would facilitate the kind of gross cognitive disconnect that could allow a country to stay mired in war forever.

 

[cheapseats]

Also, I may have introduced confusion with use of the word Unorganized. Clearly, the Unorganized Militia is organized to SOME degree or it wouldn't have a name. I thought I read somewhere that the Organized Militia=National Guard, whereas Unorganized Militia=Everyone Else of Age.

Officially unofficial.

Well regulated.

 

[cheapseats]

Intuitively, this market sector should be posting increased sales. Excellent. America NEEDS a few market sectors to start percolating, and NO market sector is more logical than Self-Defense.

Made In America.

 

[Doktor_Jeep]

If I saw some soldiers hanging around, I would ask them if they are willing to die for the plutocrats.