April 8, 2016 | 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Militia
by Nicholas Testaccio
This is a small part of a correspondence that I’ve had with someone who is an individual rights proponent. Not all the same old arguments, but I’ve decided to post my last word on the matter. I might note here that because of the lack of study, and decades of propaganda in the area of Militia, it has become difficult, at best, to enlighten someone on the inextricable link between the individual who is bound by law to participate in Militia, train and be armed as a soldier as opposed to the individual who has no obligation to “bear” all the implements required to keep this nation free and safe from “Invasions” by hordes of illegal migrants, foreign entities at our borders and ports, or cartels looting our coffers.
I should also note that even those who claim to be strict constitutionalists fail to read the Second Amendment in the same light as applied to every other word in the Constitution. It’s as if a spell has been cast that was designed to prevent the People from revitalizing the Militia that is responsible to maintain “a free state”.
By its implication and the fascinating, and “necessary” part Militia played in the “Revolution”, it should be understood that every able-bodied man who was not exempt by statute, or incapable of bearing arms was required to do so. You carried your weapon to church, in to town, and across the landscape. You not only had the right, but the duty to be prepared. These two components alone should be more than enticing to the so-called pro-gun community.
It was Virginia that was most insistent on a Bill of Rights, and as history has proven, most prophetic. Virginia, as did most colonies, recognized the need for an armed populace. “That 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; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776
I can’t be any clearer than the statement “composed of the body of the people” is all of us, contributing in some manner to the Militia. The Second Amendment was not incorporated into the Bill of Rights in order to protect a right that “We hold *** to be self-evident”. The right was there from the outset, and if it can’t be understood in that fashion, then the entire context of this nation of Sovereigns has lost all meaning.
I’m going in a different direction since I’m certain that you’ve not read any Militia laws, nor will it be admitted that other than a few of us who are actually pro-2nd, that the vast majority do not know and understand how the Founders relied upon those existing statutes to incorporate the intended awesome power of Militia.
I’m a former commodity broker so when you tell me I’m wrong, it has some significance in how things play out. I recall a time many years ago when I started buying sugar around 7¢. My plan was to buy a couple of contracts each day because my goal was 15¢. I continued with the plan as the market broke above 9¢. A friend came along and told me that the industry was selling, and that I needed to liquidate. He kept at it for days until I became concerned, as the market stalled. I liquidated my position, and then watched as sugar broke above 15¢. Almost all believed I was wrong in my analysis, as does the vast majority of the patriot community when it comes to the Militia of the Several States.
We know that the pretend pro-2nd community avoids the first 13 words of the amendment as if they are a plague. They have little to no knowledge of how Militia were drawn up some 150 years before the revolution, and how they evolved, during the revolution, in accordance with the reasons, and intent laid out in the Magna Carta. The nature and authority of Militia has not changed, nor can it be changed in the rubric that the Founders created from Article 1, to the 2nd.
While it was only money that I left on the table those years ago, it is nothing compared to the stakes we are gambling today, which are frighteningly high. So perhaps you can answer a few questions, since you claim that the Constitution depends solely on words that present day Americans neither understand, but to their own demise are unwilling to accept.
- What does “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state” mean?
- What else did the Founders deem as “necessary” for the freedom and liberty they’d won?
- Why does the Constitution note Militia authority and duty 6 times?
- What does Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15 mean; “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasion”?
- Does Section 8, Clause 16 “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia” enumerate a delegated authority that prevents the congress from [un] organizing, disarming, and leaving Militia undisciplined?
- What does the statement in Clause 16 mean as the Founders intended “for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States”?
- What does the statement in Clause 16 mean as the Founders intended “reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”?
- Are the states allowed the authority to appoint officers to the National Guard?
- Do the states train the National Guard or does the army?
- Can the states refuse to allow National Guard into the service of the federal government?
- Can the states refuse to allow Militia into the service of the federal government?
- Can the congress take the clearly defined power of Militia from the hands of the People, and hand it over to “the military [that] should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power”?
I could ask more, but it would be a pointless exercise, and you need not answer any of the questions. The one truly perplexing question for which I can draw no logical explanation, is why you would subscribe to the individual rights theory when it is the authority and power of Militia that would ultimately guarantee the individual right without any further interference from government, be it local, state, or federal?
However, let me tell you the reasons why the individual rights theory exists, and why the people would not only abdicate their power, but also disparage it.
This nation has been a burr in the side of the bankers, and oligarchs of the world since its inception. If Andrew Jackson is to be believed, he said that the European bankers made some Eight attempts on his life, the last failed assassin confessing to the fact that he was indeed in the employ of those bankers. Of course we know that Jackson was responsible for the elimination of the national bank, and thereby a target of the oligarchy.
Every war we’ve fought has been about money and the control of nation states by a few individuals who lend money and then demand payment at the cost of brave men who go off to fight in order to feed the greedy coffers of some corporation or bank. As General Smedley Butler stated, “War is a racket”. War is indeed a racket and the primer is “Money as a Tool to Control”.
Patrick Henry understood the nature of man, and knew men such as John Jay to be untrustworthy. He also understood that the character of men would not be ever vigilant, but more likely would become ambivalent, and certainly weary of the exercise of sovereignty. This is why he was such a strong advocate for a Bill of Rights, and why Virginia refused to sign the Constitution as it was written. It is certainly why Thomas Jefferson wrote “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots”. Militia is unarguably a major dynamic of the Constitution in addition to its high place as an unalienable right, and what the Founders intended as the first, and last component of a “free state”.
How do you bring the People completely under your control when the law of the land places its full force in the hands of an organized, armed, and disciplined populace? Lies, deceit, manipulation, a long-term program of turmoil, and re-education would certainly be a course.
We have the 16th and the 17th amendments, both shown to be invalid with the presentation of over 17,000 certified documents handed to the congress and to the courts. Both bodies refusing to act on the fraud.
We’ve had in our midst, as Jackson described them to be “a den of vipers and thieves”, a Federal Reserve that is no more federal than every other lie that this government spews forth. It exists for the benefit of the moneylenders, “Dollars and Sense”.
We’ve had false flag after false flag, but agents of government have convinced the people that conspiracies don’t exist. In my mind, the biggest conspiracy of all has been the removal of the power of the “Sword” from the hands of the people.
Fighting for a right using the wrong application of law comes to a root that exposes the nature of man, as Patrick Henry feared. We are corruptible, easily misled, prideful and egotistical, and by these sinful traits, we are bound to abandon not only what our Founders provided, but easily persuaded to forsake our progeny.
As previously noted, all wars are fought over money, and certainly the money flows for and against the 2nd. Pro-2nd groups take the money to fight a battle that cannot come to a lawful conclusion so the contributions are endless. Those who rape our treasury fund anti-2nd groups so that when we finally wake up there will be little chance of victory.
There is no convincing the majority that the “Sword” was clearly placed in our hands, and it needed to be maintained as it was originally designed. If we were to take up this mantle we would first have to admit to ourselves that we’ve been duped into a position, for which there is no proper solution. The individual is incapable of standing up to the state in a martial confrontation, and even in a court the game is rigged against the individual. He/she needs the support and lawful integrity of “A well-regulated” body of his fellow citizens who have the defined duty to bring the state back to compliance with our will.
These so-called patriots and pro-2nd people have no explanation as to how to “redress [a] grievance” when the court tells us that the government has no obligation to respond to our complaints no matter what the facts; Magna Carta told us otherwise.
This group of patriots can’t explain to me where they go, or to whom they report if they are part of this constitutionally impossible “unorganized militia”.
What is most distressing is that the “unorganized militia” is perfectly content never mustering, training, or learning the skills of a qualified soldier. They would much rather leave that to the few who volunteer a portion of their lives, and all too often their limbs.
Surely there must be some who are of the same opinion as myself. As I’ve mentioned here before, Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr. has written extensively on Militia, including “The Sword and Sovereignty”. While 2nd amendment groups speak gibberish of the right, and the court opines nothing but mumbo-jumbo, Dr. Vieira has written a tome that not only eclipses the information from Selective Service, but it also does so in dramatic fashion. “The Sword and Sovereignty” is over 2300 pages, with more than 4,000 footnotes on law and history.
Dr. Vieira has also written “Thirteen Words”, “Three Rights”, and “Constitutional Homeland Security”, all of which would be a good starting point for anyone wishing to honestly explore what the 2nd is truly about. However, none of these books are at the top of the reading lists of any 2nd group. None of Dr. Vieira’s books will be promoted by the likes of LaPierre, or any of this disdainful mob that misleads, and attorneys that misrepresent.
I grow tired of a debate with those who would much rather argue a misapplication of law than to muster a few times a year in order to gain the skills “necessary to the security of a free state”. It is exhausting to watch as the wool is pulled over the eyes of millions of Americans who would become nothing more than fodder, should God forbid our worst fears are brought to these shores. That is to say if it is not already taking place.