• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    You are.

    Your normal compensation is the enjoyment of “a free State”.

    If you are called forth to serve in the armed forces, your compensation is your paycheck.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Your normal compensation is the enjoyment of “a free State”.

      Very well. Please show me the court ruling to that effect.

      If you are called forth to serve in the armed forces, your compensation is your paycheck.

      So I am not in a well-regulated militia now? Why can’t you keep your story straight? If I am in a well-regulated militia now I am entitled to be paid for it, if vague promises of freedom are my payments then why do I get paid for jury duty, if I am not in a militia then why can I buy a gun?

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        My story is straight. The flaw is your lack of understanding the difference between “militia” and “armed forces”.

        The “armed forces” are the “armies” and the “Navy” provided for under Article I Section 8 clauses 12, 13, and 14. They are the professional forces hired by the government to serve its needs.

        The militia is not an “army” or the “Navy”. The militia is not an “armed service”. It is not regulated under clauses 12, 13, or 14.

        The “militia” is We The People. Under Article I Section 8 clauses 15 and 16, Congress has the authority to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining (training) the militia, as well as calling us forth for purposes of enforcing law, suppressing insurrection, and repelling invasion. Additionally, under the 2nd Amendment, we are directly charged with providing the security of a free State.

        When we are “called forth” from the militia, we enter what the Constitution refers to as the “armies” or the “Navy”, and we receive a paycheck for our military service. We are now regulated under laws enacted in accordance with clauses 12, 13, and/or 14.

        When we are not called forth from the militia, we still have the obligation to provide the security of a free State, as described in the 2nd Amendment.

        Where you do not receive the benefits of a free State (you are incarcerated for draft dodging, for example) you are not obligated to provide the state’s security.

        You’re free to try to sue the government for additional compensation relating to your militia service, but whatever you end up receiving from the public, you will also end up being required to pay to the public.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Indeed. If you don’t think the militia is sufficiently well-regulated, what additional regulations do you believe you should be subjected to?

            I’m guessing that you are not willing to engage in any militia training or instruction, nor will you accept any additional regulation on yourself beyond registration for selective service.

            That being the case, you are declaring that the militia is already sufficiently “well regulated”.

            If I am wrong, please describe the additional regulations you feel should be imposed upon you.

            I do not feel the militia is sufficiently well regulated. I think every student should take 8 hours of instruction on the laws governing use of force as a condition of graduation, and everyone should be offered and encouraged to take a 2-hour class on safe gun handling. I believe Congress should exercise their authority under Article I Section 8 clauses 15 and 16 and mandate this training to all members of the militia, yourself included.