Civilian Army a backdoor dismemberment of the 2nd Amendment

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

myrockfight

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
403
Location
Saint Petersburg, FL
So I have heard of someone talking about a civilian army.

Do you guys think that a Civilian army would just be a means of justifying the confiscation of guns along the lines of, "If you want a gun, join the Civilian Army? When I heard about it, that immediately came to mind. The Third Riech came to mind right after.

Is this something we are going to have to be worried about in the future to protect the 2nd Amendment?


*as per THR rules = this is not a thread about politics. Keep it that way. I'm simply discussing the finer points of a Civvie army.
 
It depends on the rules governing the membership of the civilian army. If this membership is limited in anyway (i.e. physical requirements, age requirements, etc) then this argument would be against the 2nd.

If the army membership had no prerequisites, and even had the authority to conscript during times of extreme emergency, then it would prove one of the necessities of the 2nd, at least from a national security standpoint.

So do you have any other info about how this civilian army is different from a traditional militia, or is this completely hypothetical?
 
Civilian army? Is that like a militia, or just another word for militia?
Militias have been sufficiently demonized in the past fifteen years.
I doubt the MSM, for example, would differentiate between a militia and a "civilian army." To them it would be the same thing. The politicians would demonize such a thing too; any group of people, organized with guns, that wasn't under the control of the federal government.com is NOT going to be well received by the powers that be.
OTOH if the government was going to confiscate guns like that THEY don't need to create a "civilian army." In the wake of Heller such a thing would be hard enough to pull off (unless under a new president with new appointees to SCOTUS, another decision overturns Heller) so I don't really see it happening.
Our RTKABA may not be absolutly secure against future incursions but I just don't think they need go this rout to do it.
 
You are constitutionally already part of a "Civilian Army" specifically the unorganized militia so the point is moot
 
Seeing as the Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, not collective, I don't see how this could have any effect.
 
What the heck is a "civilian army"? The definition of civilian is "not in the armed forces". So any armed army, is by definition not "civilian".
 
Does this have anything to do with Obama calling for mandatory government service from high school and college aged kids?
 
The youth corp like in the days of Der Fuhrer. Like the ones in Russia that are trained and armed with badges and go a round dragging in people breaking the tax laws. China has them, and then there are Cheney's private armies. We don't want that. How ever some need summer boot camp, to teach them morals, right and wrong. If they went over and fixed up a little old ladies house that would be nice. Indoctrination starts early, it's the direction that I question.
 
The Heller decision has declared the 2nd to be an individual right, apart from militia service. So the "civilian army" would not be a threat, unless Heller is overturned.

But what in blue blazes are you talkin' about, anyway?
 
Obama recently referred to creating a "civilian national defense force". Understandably, the phrase itself stands out and has been heavily criticized out-of-context. The context was a speech exclusively devoted to the context of "community service" (broadly stated). The phrase was (apparently) extemporaniously added to the prepared text. Being such a loaded phrase with attributable meaning inconsistent with the context, methinks he was not advocating a US gestappo/SS, but instead (like many recent POTUS candidates, most of whom lost) a pumped-up soup-kitchen habitat-for-humanity type "force" ... unfortunately, it was a crummy choice of words and will garner a great deal of hostility.
 
Hey now, Back during the Carter administration I was a member of the Y.A.C.C., Young Adult Conservation Corps, or Yaks for short. We were paid minimum wage and fought forest fires, planted trees, repaired stream beds, built and maintained trails, repaired fish hatcheries and fire lookouts etc. It was a pivotal time in my life.

Modeled after FDRs C.C.C we actually worked at fixing and maintaining some of the projects that the CCC built.

The project was phased out early in the Reagan administration.

I wish my kids could have the same opportunity to serve their country in such a positive way.

To keep this gun related, the folks I shoot with most frequently lately, I met through the Y.A.C.C. and my son and I get to go back to the woods where I met his mother, my wife and shoot.
 
Last edited:
I wish my kids could have the same opportunity to serve their country in such a positive way.
Click to expand...
They do. Nobody is stopping them. Serving your country doesn't always require gov't coordination thereof.
 
Barry wants to form a youth corps that will be loyal to his administration.
Click to expand...

I think that's a fine idea. Germany had something like that in the 1930s that provided a pool of fit, trained young men ready, willing and able to serve the Fatherland.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top