An experiment- define "militia"

**drizzt** · 12th October 2005, 05:38 PM

Not from a gun control standpoint,not as it applies to the US constitution.

Please give your definition of the word "militia"(this was a debate I was having with my polisci proff and another student.....).

Again, please disregard the US gun control issues, as they were not the focus of our discussion, and will make the result of this little census invalid.....or at least colored for my purposes.

**h2o** · 12th October 2005, 05:58 PM

A militia, for me, is a group of armed people who take the law in their own hans. The type of armament really doesn't matter, they could be unarmed too. I'll redefine it: A group of people who take the law in their own hands using violence.

With a reclaimer that I might have misinterpreted the english word

**drizzt** · 12th October 2005, 06:04 PM

Hard to come from that viewpoint (not one ive heard traditionaly). I was infering more to the traditional militia units, not vigilante not jobs that use the title....

**LarsCW** · 12th October 2005, 06:09 PM

In my oppinion a militia is a group of ppl that took up arms to pursuit a certain objective, good or bad not possible to be able to gain within the timeframe they wanna achieve it.

And I think there should be some form of organisation within the group to be able to speak of a militia.

The dictionairy's view

reserve army of citizens that are called upon during emergencies; underground citizen's paramilitary group whose goal is to defend individual rights against interference by the federal government

**Ken Morgan** · 12th October 2005, 08:29 PM

Trained men and women at arms who in time of need, supplement the regular state military

**Theodore** · 12th October 2005, 11:08 PM

In Saxon times the militia was composed of all subjects and citizens capable of bearing arms, regardless of age or parental authority

**Paikea** · 13th October 2005, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by Theodore

In Saxon times the militia was composed of all subjects and citizens capable of bearing arms, regardless of age or parental authority

Except for that whole Norman conquest thing, it worked pretty well too. Bloody Norman swine.

**drizzt** · 13th October 2005, 02:22 AM

This is interesting, we have half giving a classic definition of the terms original meaning, but half defining it as its used in the modern radicalist movement.

Interesting set of views.

**Tono** · 13th October 2005, 02:34 AM

LarsCW's 1st dictionary definition best fits my beliefs as to the purpose of a militia. The 2nd is more of a modern interpretation driven, I'd think, by the few groups of nutbags in various rural locations who form a so-called "militia" to protect themselves from the federal government. What can I say: some people truly believe in the conspiracy theory of history.

Of course, drizzt, if you were having this discussion with a political science professor (now *there's* a degree you can use in real life...ahem...sorry...very biased opinion from a guy with both his bachelor's and master's degrees in business), I can only assume the framework was the 2nd Amendment, despite the academic limitation you put on the discussion.

So, here's a question right back at you (and I'm asking only because I'd genuinely like to hear your thoughts): what do *you* believe are the denotative and connotative meanings of "militia"?

Cheers all!

**Theodore** · 13th October 2005, 05:24 AM

Originally Posted by Paikea

Except for that whole Norman conquest thing, it worked pretty well too. Bloody Norman swine.

Sheesh, one arrow. That was all the difference between William the Bastard and William the Conqueror.

**Optomitrist** · 13th October 2005, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by Tono

So, here's a question right back at you (and I'm asking only because I'd genuinely like to hear your thoughts): what do *you* believe are the denotative and connotative meanings of "militia"?

Cheers all!

woah buddy, not all of us are in government class, use smaller vocab word for the rest of us.

**Theodore** · 13th October 2005, 05:31 AM

10 U.S.C. Section 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. (b) The classes of the militia are - (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

**drizzt** · 13th October 2005, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by Theodore

10 U.S.C. Section 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. (b) The classes of the militia are - (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Thats quoted form the Militia act of 1792 isnt it?

**Theodore** · 13th October 2005, 05:39 AM

But modified to include the National Guard (which was not extant) and women (which were) in the late 1700s.

**drizzt** · 13th October 2005, 05:51 AM

Originally Posted by Tono

LarsCW's 1st dictionary definition best fits my beliefs as to the purpose of a militia. The 2nd is more of a modern interpretation driven, I'd think, by the few groups of nutbags in various rural locations who form a so-called "militia" to protect themselves from the federal government. What can I say: some people truly believe in the conspiracy theory of history.

Of course, drizzt, if you were having this discussion with a political science professor (now *there's* a degree you can use in real life...ahem...sorry...very biased opinion from a guy with both his bachelor's and master's degrees in business), I can only assume the framework was the 2nd Amendment, despite the academic limitation you put on the discussion.

So, here's a question right back at you (and I'm asking only because I'd genuinely like to hear your thoughts): what do *you* believe are the denotative and connotative meanings of "militia"?

Cheers all!

Actualy the discussion was focused more on wether militia's can exist in a modern nation. It actualy began as an aside to a debate over gun control, but my proffesor and the gentleman we were discussing it with broke off into a discusson of what a militia is defined as, and wether one could exist in its classical meaning.

I take my definition of militia from the above cited legal code, were as there is an organized militia force, and a militia force that can be gathered in time of war for defense of a state and/or the common defense of a region that is not a standing force.

There are, in reality, two issues addressed in the 2nd Amendment to the constitution. The first is the right to bear arms, btu the second, and oft ignored, is the right to form a militia for common defense. That ammendment was placed for two reasons. First because of a largely anti-federalist movement that advocated states autonomy(wich is being ignored by the congress and supreme court)and, by the founding fathers own admission, into the constitution to leave an avenue for the overthrow of an overtly corrupt government. While I do not agree with the "rural wackjobs" who form there own militias reasoning or values, that idea was primary reasoning behing the 2nd amendment(i can find supporting literature to jefferson and madison's views if necessary).

The debate began because the individual in question challenged the ability of a militia to exist, and its usefullness in a modern society. My opinions on the actual usefullness of an unorganized, traditional, militia are still undecided.

I was, and still am, interested in the opinions of other US citizens , and the world, as to the exacting definition(since a "modern" interpretation of the word seems to lean towards only national guard) of a "militia", and i suppose now since my reasoning has been explained. there opinion on the ability(or need) of a militia to exist ina modern nation. As I asked before, please leave your views on gun control out of this topic. Assume that wether or not guns were legal, the militia im reffering to could obtain them.