From: [c d t] at [sw.stratus.com] (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Second Amendment Law (was Libertarian Gun)
Date: 23 Aug 1994 01:36:03 GMT

In article <336pfj$[t 7 k] at [news.onramp.net]>, Henry Tudor <[t--d--r] at [onramp.net]> writes:

> > In US v. Miller, they held that the 
> > Amendment was designed to protect a militia of "all males 
> > physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense"
> > and must be interpreted in this light. If individual gun 
> > ownership contributed in any way, then it is protected.

>         But in Perpich (1990), the militia is defined as being 
>         "a body of armed citizens trained to military duty, who
>          may be called out in certain cases".

Tudor lies again by citing out of context.  This is one of his 
favorite tricks.  He hopes that none of us have the source material
on hand in order to catch him in his lie.  But we do.

The full quote is:

     "a body of armed citizens trained to military duty, who may be 
      called out in certain cases, but may not be kept on service like
      standing armies, in time of peace...

>          In doing so they 
>          state that the national guard IS the militia. 

No, in fact, they say quite the opposite.

     "Notwithstanding the brief periods of federal service, the members 
      of the state Guard unit continue to satisfy this description of the
      militia.  In a sense, all of them now must keep three hats in their
      closets--a civilian hat, a state militia hat, and an army hat--only 
      one of which is worn at any particular time. 

     "When the state militia hat is being worn, the 'drilling and other
      exercises' referred to by the Illinois Supreme Court {in Dunne v. 
      People} are performed pursuant to 'the Authority of training the
      Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress, but 
      when that hat is replaced by the federal hat, the Militia Clause
      is no longer applicable."

That is, the Guard member becomes a member of the federal Army and is 
no longer under the authority and control of the state Governor.

>         And so far that is the latest word on the definition of a 
>           militia, so Miller is somewhat superceded (but not over-
>           ruled) to that respect. 

Dream on, Tudor.
-- 

[c d t] at [rocket.sw.stratus.com]   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
                              write today for my special Investors' Packet...