Re: Congress Said That A Militia Man Was Not In Service Until He Showed Up Where He Was Supposed To Serve


Magus wrote:
Scout wrote:
"The Lone Weasel" <loneweasel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146328100.005828.136850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bama Brian wrote:
The Lone Weasel wrote:
Daniel wrote:
The Lone Weasel wrote:
Homespun Inc. wrote:
The Lone Weasel wrote:


[begin excerpt]

4. Under the clauses of the constitution, the following points have
been decided.

1. If congress had chosen, they might by law, have considered a
militia
man, called into the service of 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.

- Bouvier Law Dictionary, "M"

[end excerpt]

How much less is the unorganized militia deserving of militia
service
status unless they show up for service?

I'd call you a retard, but they don't deserve that stigma.

Nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria. No one
shall take advantage of his own wrong. Co. Litt. 148.


We were just dicussing this exact topic in another thread-- and I
note
that you ran like a little girl when I posted this:

10 USC 311 - "Militia: composition and classes"

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied
males
at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of
title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a
declaration
of intention to become citizens of the United States and of female
citizens of the United States who are members of the National
Guard.

The militia of the United States consists of members of the National
Guard.

Wrong. The National Guard is a branch of the US Army.

Wrong.

It sure as hell is - something all those NG folks who served, or are now
serving in Iraq found out, to their eternal dismay.

The Texas National Guard is a state militia;


Ok.


the National Guard of the
United States is the state militia in its federal role.


Sorry, the National Guard of the United States isn't a militia. It is a
reserve of the Army or Air Force and part of the MILITARY hierarchy

(3) The term "Army National Guard of the United States" means the reserve
component of the Army all of whose members are members of the Army National
Guard.

(5) The term "Air National Guard of the United States" means the reserve
component of the Air Force all of whose members are members of the Air
National Guard

10USC101

The National Guard of the United States is NOT a militia. It is a MILITARY
force.

One which every member of the National Guard belongs to 24/7.

Glad you finally recognized the abuse of our state militia by the Bush
regime, Blamma. Fuckin took you long enough.

Yep, the state militia shouldn't be subject to call up by the federal
government except to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections
or repel invasions. Those are the ONLY Constitutionally valid reasons for
the federal government to call upon the militia. Except the National Guard
isn't really a militia, it's a federal military force hiding behind the
appearance of a militia. Otherwise it would be fully subject to the mandates
and restrictions placed upon the militia by the Constitution of the United
States of America. The National Guard isn't.

What the Lonely Weasel Penis won't admit to:

The National Guard was raised under Congress's authority to raise
standing armies.

Wrong. See US Constitution Art I Sect 8 Clauses 15-16.

The National Guard was intended to be sent abroad,
while the Militia can't be sent abroad.

You understand these are exactly the same persons in the well-regulated
militia, the National Guard of the Several States and the National
Guard of the United States, right Magoo?

Standing armies are not the
Militia. Congress can dismiss standing armies.

Congress also organizes the militia; so Congress could dismiss
significant portions of the militia at will. And a Republican Congress
just might do that.

If Congress does not
appropriate a budget every two years, standing armies are automatically
dismissed.

If states don't obey federal militia laws, Congress can suspend militia
funds.

Standing armies are not protected by the Second Amendment.

Standing armies do not really stand all the time.

[begin proof of this claim]

Constitutional charter of the Guard

http://www.arng.army.mil/history/Constitution/

The Army National Guard's charter is the Constitution of the
United States. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution
contains a series of "militia clauses," vesting distinct
authority and responsibilities in the federal government and
the state governments. These clauses and follow-on
legislation have sculpted the Guard as you see it today.
Here are summaries that will help you understand how the
Guard came to be what it is today.


Article I, Section 8; Clause 15

Clause 15 provides that the Congress has three
constitutional grounds for calling up the militia -- "to
execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrection and
repel invasions." All three standards appear to be
applicable only to the Territory of the United States.


Article I, Section 8; Clause 16

Clause 16 gives Congress the power "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." That same clause specifically
reserves to the States the authority to establish a state-
based militia, to appoint the officers and to train the
militia according to the discipline prescribed by the
Congress. As written, the clause seeks to limit federal
power over State militias during peacetime.


The Armies Clause

The "armies clause" in Article I, Section 8, conferred on
Congress the power to provide for the common defense of the
United States, declare war, raise and support armies, and
make rules for the "government and regulation of the land
and naval forces." The Congress also was granted authority
to make all laws "necessary and proper" for carrying out
such powers. Under this provision, congressional power over
the National Guard appears to be far-reaching.


Article I, Section 10

Article I, Section 10 provides that no state, without the
consent of the Congress, shall keep troops or ships of war
in time of peace, or engage in war unless actually invaded.
Be sure to see the Second Amendment for more about this.


The Second Amendment

The Second Amendment qualified Article I, Section 10 by
making insuring that the federal government could not disarm
the state militias. One part of the Bill of Rights, insisted
on by the anti-federalists, 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."


Article IV, Section 4

Article IV, Section 4 provides that the federal government
"shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican
form of government," and shall protect each of the States
against invasion. At State request, the federal government
was to protect the States "against domestic violence."
Through these provisions, the potential for both cooperative
Federalism and for tension between the "militia" and the
"army" clauses was built into the constitution.


Article II, Section 2

Article II, Section 2 places all forces, including the
militia when in federal service, under the control of the
executive branch by making the president Commander-in-Chief.


Article I, Section 8

Article I, Section 8 gave the ultimate control to the
Congress, by granting it the sole power to collect taxes to
pay for the military, to declare war and to employ the
militia for common purposes of internal security. Existing
State militias could be maintained, although troops could be
called into national service. But the founding fathers
moderated that authority by leaving the individual States
with the explicit responsibility for appointing officers and
for supervising peacetime training of the citizen-soldiers.


The Militia Act of 1792

The Militia Act of 1792 subsequently expanded federal policy
and clarified the role of the militia. It required all able
bodied men aged 18 to 45 to serve, to be armed, to be
equipped at their own expense and to participate in annual
musters. The 1792 act established the idea of organizing
these militia forces into standard divisions, brigades,
regiments, battalions and companies, as directed by the
State legislatures.


The militia concept put to the test in the War of 1812

For the 111 years that the Militia Act of 1792 remained in
effect, it defined the position of the militia in relation
to the federal government. The War of 1812 tested this
unique America defense establishment. To fight the War of
1812, the republic formed a small regular military and
trained it to protect the frontiers and coastlines. Although
it performed poorly in the offensive against Canada, the
small force of regulars backed by a well-armed militia,
accomplished its defensive mission well. Generals like
Andrew Jackson proved, just as they had in the Revolution,
that regulars and militia could be effective when employed
as a team.


Posse Comitatus

In 1867, the Congress suspended the southern states' right
to organize their militias until a state was firmly under
the control of an acceptable government. The U.S. Army was
used to enforce martial law in the South during
Reconstruction. Expansion of the military's role in domestic
life, however, did not occur without debate or response.
Reaction to the use of the Army in suppressing labor unrest
in the North and guarding polls in the South during the 1876
election led to congressional enactment of the Posse
Comitatus Act in 1878. Designed to limit the president's use
of military forces in peacetime, this statute provided that:
"...it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of
the United States... for the purpose of executing the laws,
except on such cases and under such circumstances as such
employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the
Constitution or by any act of Congress..."


The States revise the military codes - 1881 to 1892

Concern over the militia's new domestic role also led the
States to reexamine their need for a well-equipped and
trained militia, and between 1881 and 1892, every state
revised the military code to provide for an organized force.
Most changed the name of their militias to the National
Guard, following New York's example.


The *** Act, 1903

Between 1903 and the 1920's, legislation was enacted that
strengthened the Army National Guard as a component of the
national defense force. The *** Act of 1903 replaced the
1792 Militia Act and affirmed the National Guard as the
Army's primary organized reserve.


The National Defense Act, 1916

The National Defense Act of 1916 further expanded the
Guard's role and guaranteed the State militias' status as
the Army's primary reserve force. Furthermore, the law
mandated use of the term "National Guard" for that force.
Moreover, the President was given authority, in case of war
or national emergency, to mobilize the National Guard for
the duration of the emergency. The number of yearly drills
increased from 24 to 48 and annual training from five to 15
days. Drill pay was authorized for the first time.


The National Defense Act Amendments, 1920

The National Defense Act Amendments of 1920 established that
the chief of the Militia Bureau (later the National Guard
Bureau) would be a National Guard officer, that National
Guard officers would be assigned to the general staff and
that the divisions, as used by the Guard in World War I,
would be reorganized.


The National Guard Mobilization Act, 1933

The National Guard Mobilization Act of 1933 made the
National Guard of the United States a component of the Army
at all times, which could be ordered into active federal
service by the President whenever Congress declared a
national emergency.


The Total Force Policy, 1973

Following the experience of fighting an unpopular war in
Vietnam, the 1973 Total Force Policy was designed to involve
a large portion of the American public by mobilizing the
National Guard from its thousands of locations throughout
the United States when needed. The Total Force Policy
required that all active and reserve military organizations
of the United States be treated as a single integrated
force. A related benefit of this approach is to permit
elected officials to have a better sense of public support
or opposition to any major military operation. This policy
echoes the original intentions of the founding fathers for a
small standing army complemented by citizen-soldiers.

See also: http://www.arng.army.mil/publications_resources/

[end proof that standing armies do not really stand all the time]

--


Yours truly,

The Lone Weasel

.