the Purpose of the national guard was so they could increase the number of men deployed abroad in foreign wars, militia are domestic defense and cannot be deployed abroad. The NG is what the constitution refers to as “Troops of war” and cannot be constitutional militia themselves.
1 Like
Thanks for the video and link, I haven’t done the deep dive on the link, but did watch the video.
This policy is calling for organizing the unorganized militia (to use the videos terms).
The two biggest differentiators between the NG and UM (unorganized militia) I see are:
- compulsory participation
- limited use participation to domestic territories only
We could turn the NG into both of those things via an act of congress:
- mandatory 24 month(?) participation in the NG (likely after high school)
- eliminate/modify Title 10 (which grants the federal authority over the NG (Title 32 grants State Authority making the governor the CIC));
These are both things that would also overlap with and harmonize a few of the other proposals on this site along similar lines.
This seems to imply the funding for the UM would remain federal then…
It seems the easiest thing would be to revoke title 10 granting federal authority over the NG, recall those troops home, and leave all the existing funding sources largely untouched… It’s a pure budget reduction, or at worst reallocation if they bring up more Army to fill the gaps.
Otherwise you have to organize and find new spending for an entirely new branch (or 54 branches) of military without cutting funding from the existing branches.
I have still not seen any substantive responses to the questions regarding who pays for this new organized UM (federal or state, taxes or volunteer citizens)?
If the state or volunteers pay for it then should anything be done to standardize the training, equipping, and overall readiness disparities that will occur between the many states and territories?
I also have not seen a substantive response to who decides / what are the expected conditions when this UM would start firing bullets or otherwise physically engages in Armed conflict with federal forces (which if we don’t take over the NG and use it as the states’ militia would most likely be the NG that the UM would be fighting against)?
Simple question, where does the federal government get their money? If extra-constitutional, unconstitutional or otherwise specious federal agencies (FBI, ATF, FEMA, Border Patrol, NG, etc) are absorbed by the militia of the several states (because they are performing a militia function) that would include their budgets as well. State law enforcement and several other state agencies and departments as well as their budgets would be rolled into the Militia of the several states as well. It can also add funding via fines for dereliction of duty.
It can also be partiality funded by the people directly in the form of them buying their own firearms and accouterments in compliance with state and federal regulations (there is already precedence for this in the early Militia statutes).
Okay, now we’re running off down what seems to me almost an entirely different rabbit hole from the initially proposed policy.
I did in fact already see the overlap with state and federal agencies and asked about clarifying what distinguishes them from each other. While I don’t think all of the agencies you mentioned could be absorbed, I get the point you’re driving at. I don’t think I agree it’s a good idea to merge all these agencies into a single body, but that’s more because I just can’t think through the pros and cons / risks and benefits of such a radical transformation from the status quo.
Also not sure that replacing the state agencies listed is a good idea either, especially not local law enforcement. The kinds of training and routine activities I believe that make for good law enforcement officers is very different from the kind of training I would envision for an UM.
There would still be professional full time LEO’s, they would just have more manpower from the local population who would aid them on a rotational basis and they would be subject to their local militia chain of command rather than an Independent police department.
I think you are not understanding the proposal because some of your questions are not making sense to me in context. I mention this and it is implied in the policy proposal. What does the constitution say the duties of the Militia are? They are to “execute the law… suppress insurrection , and repel invasion” it is a duty for the Militia of the several states and it cannot be delegated to other agencies that do not even appear in the constitution. The Militia are are a permanent fixture in our constitution just as the executive, legislative , and judicial branches are yet people seem to think the 1903 Dick Act can override the constitution and “unorganize” the Militia (the institution where we the people hold sovereignty/self-determination). Would anyone think it possible to “unorganize” Congress, the Presidency, or the Supreme Court without even proposing an amendment to do so? You cannot delegate sovereign powers (the militia powers) and remain sovereign.
2 Likes
There already is a law establishing the classes of militia in each state. 10 USC 311 explains it thoroughly and explicitly.
That is a complete bait and switch and in no way follows the Constitution or natural law for that matter. Where is the power to “Unorganize” the militia in whole or in part to be found in the constitution?
1 Like
Would the chain of command include the same Mayor or County Supervisor also tasked with appointing the Police Commissioner?
I’m not convinced the Police are as separate a body as you suggest they are…
The Police also have a Chain of Command. I don’t see this chain of command structure as being materially dissimilar to the militia chain of command.
The chain of command does not distinguish the level of corruptibility involved…
What is the chain of command in your neighborhood? Where are YOU in that chain of command? If “every able bodied free male” is not part of that chain of command there is a HUGE difference between the Militia and a professional set apart police force that isn’t accountable to the people they are supposed to be serving. If you and your local community are not part of that chain of command then you and your community are not part of a sovereign body. The Militia structure completely shifts incentives.
Sure, but let’s get real, if I was in that chain of command I’d likely be at the bottom of it with most everyone else.
Where would women be in your chain of command if not similar to my relationship to LEO? Are you picturing a situation where every able bodied man is roaming on guard duty each night like some armed Neighborhood Watch program?
It feels like the same argument to me… I’m not certain what the relevance is of acknowledging that there will be people in society who are not members of the militia is to this chain-of-command point?
I was thinking that mandatory participation in the militia would be for a couple years after high school… You’re making it sound like it’s supposed to be for life… If not for life, than as men age out of militia service, there will be lots of men who are not part of the militia’s chain-of-command…
What’s the problem with that?
It’s not the same thing, but I am represented by my community members on the Police Citizen Oversight board and members of my community are the same people who are the active duty officers of the police force in my community.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_oversight_of_law_enforcement
I am a member of the voting community and I do have say in who leads the police force. It’s not the same as being part of the police force, you’re correct in that, but I disagree with the assertion that I am totally divorced from it. The LEO are not some completely sovereign entity like an Indian Tribe on tribal lands or something.
1 Like
As a former state level CSM of a state Militia. I know the history of my state very well. I would love to see this get more support. Each state is different California SDF with a more firefighter , Florida disaster preparedness.
I honestly would love to see paid time off to support activities. My state gave a tax break which was awesome. I was a Federal Employee and my agency afforded military time for training. But not all agencies do that.
And YES, I support the SDFs being weapons training.
I always felt a SDF could be used like a baseball farm league. To train and bring unhealthy kids up to a level to serve in the Federal military.
So many people don’t understand this fact
All the more reason to have state defense forces
I would like to add that each state can decide if there is a mandatory military service in the state military with emphasis on constitutional law lnstruction.