The "Miliitia" Question Again

[DinoR]

@barbitu8

Katrina affected La. not SC. Wikipedia must have meant Hugo.

I had to check. From the SC State Guard recruiting page it looks like wiki got it right with Katrina. :eek:

The State Guard is not usually deployed outside the state. Some units, however, did serve in New York after the attacks of 9/11 and in Louisiana in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

[ftg]

Another state with a “state guard” independent of the state National Guard (and not eligible for federalization) is Washington.

I think treating “state militia”, “state guard” and “state National Guard” as separate terms is warranted. I.e, do you call the state guard and the state National Guard the state militias, or just one and if so which?

[SCAdian]

Here in Connecticut we have the Governor’s Guards - two companies of foot guards and two companies of horse guards.

[jtur88]

An often-overlooked fact is that the founders wrote a Preamble to the Bill of Rights, explaining the purpose of the Amendments. In part, the Preamble reads:

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire,*** in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse ***of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added

Which would suggest that the motive for adding the Second Amendment was to preclude a danger of the government itself assuming a power that misconstrued or abused the Constitution which was intended to limit the government. In other words, the reason for the Second Amendment was to put in force a restrictive clause to preserve the power of the citizenry to resist a government running amok, such as arbitrary martial law or a police state – misconstruction or abuse of powers.

[barbitu8]

@jtur88

An often-overlooked fact is that the founders wrote a Preamble to the Bill of Rights, explaining the purpose of the Amendments. In part, the Preamble reads:

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire,*** in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse ***of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added

Which would suggest that the motive for adding the Second Amendment was to preclude a danger of the government itself assuming a power that misconstrued or abused the Constitution which was intended to limit the government. In other words, the reason for the Second Amendment was to put in force a restrictive clause to preserve the power of the citizenry to resist a government running amok, such as arbitrary martial law or a police state – misconstruction or abuse of powers.

The Bill of Rights was added directed at the federal government so that states’ rights would not be demolished. Hence, the Bill of Rights confer upon the states and their citizens certain protections from the federal government. The citizens could not assert that the states would acknowledge those rights. The 14th Amendment provided for “substantial due process.” The legislative history behind it discloses that this amendment would not incorporate the Bill of Rights in total, but that the courts would incorporate them individually as the courts deem appropriate. There are still a few not to be incorporated.