'Neighborhood Militia'? Comments, suggestions and critique WELCOME

[RX-178]

I'm going to admit straight out, that this is FAR from being well thought out, or even having the details considered at all. I literally just came up with it now, and I'd like any and all thoughts about it.


The idea is, everyone here knows that the main failing of the police is that their response time is not, and can not ever be adequate to respond to situations where someone's life is in danger. That's why people have home defense and carry weapons. But not all people have those. There are a myriad of reasons why someone may no longer have the legal right, no longer have the physical or mental capacity to use, or simply may not have the desire to keep the means of defending themselves and their home. In my view, none of this means that they deserve to be helpless.

I was thinking on the issue, and just almost randomly got the thought that because of how long the police take to respond, a neighbor in trouble might as well call me and I'd go over. It was a little internal joke when I thought it, but now I'm wondering if that's such a bad idea?

If you are a firearms owner that keeps home defense weapons at a constant state of readiness to defend your home and your person, and you are willing to use these weapons in the defense of your neighbors and friends, would it be reasonable to actually arrange for that?


For example, let's say I'm very friendly with the neighbors. They know me, I know them. I keep a handgun with an underbarrel flashlight on the nightstand when I sleep, but the guy across the street (we'll just call him Joe) doesn't own firearms. I told Joe that if he's ever being burglarized, or suffers a home invasion, he can call me.

So one night, Joe calls and says 'It's Joe, there's people in my house.' I could grab my handgun off the nightstand and be across the street PDQ to help him. Far sooner than any police response (note that Joe didn't even have to say his address or play 20 questions with the dispatcher).


I already know there's going to be legal issues, that are going to vary depending on location, but legalities aside, do you think this is a viable concept?

 

[Cosmoline]

That's pretty much the way it used to be in this country, before we became reliant on the blue line. There's no reason you can't get to know your neighbors and be able to help them in any number of situations. I wouldn't call it a "militia" though. And of course you have to trust them, which these days is asking a lot. Maybe too much.

 

[TallPine]

I've told a couple of our neighbors, that if they ever had any "security problems" while their husbands were at work/out of town, to call me first before 911. (I'm a mile away and deputies are 25 miles away)

And when our infamous ex-neighbor still lived behind us, several folks on the VFD told me to call them if I needed help. (I told them okay - and bring a shovel )

But this is rural Montana - quite different than your average neighborhood

 

[goon]

I haven't read the rest of the thread so this has probably come up, but why doesn't Joe own any guns?
Personally, I wouldn't hop into my spandex suit and button on my flashy red cape just because "Joe" called me because he was scared. His defense is his responsibility, not mine.
So assuming that Joe is a completely capable, competent adult, Joe had better be getting his own gun into action.

Having said that, if Joe was actually Joanna, a single mom who wasn't educated about guns yet but who was trying to get up to speed, I'd be there in a heartbeat.
If Joanna's husband was deployed to Iraq and heard some noise in the house that night, I'd definitely come to her aid.
And if Joe was an elderly man who gave his deer rifle to his son long ago but was still a decent guy just trying to live out the rest of his life in peace, I'd probably be in for that too.
If Joe was a normal guy like me who was interested in working with me and others to assure the common defense of the neighborhood, I'd definitely drop what I was doing, grab some firepower, and be at his door just about as fast as I could get my shoes on.

But as I said, if Joe is just a weenified poor excuse for a man who is unwilling to take any responsibility for his safety (or anyone else's), well...
I just don't see any reason to risk my life for someone who definitely wouldn't do the same for me.

 

[Otemigo]

Neighborhood Watch

A couple of us (that are armed) know to contact each other with suspicious activity. If it is an emergency... 911 should be dialed first (at least to document the concern). This will get some trained individuals on the way to handle some of the concerns a gun can't help you with.

I love this topic. Just remember... some neighbors may be against guns and other Freedoms. As nice as it would be to help them with an "I told you so" it may be better to let nature take its course. I am not being mean... just realistic.

I have neighbors that I believe would file suit against me if I protected them, but in the disarray I put a hole in their wall or fence. These neighbors may need to learn the hard way. As a Christian I may love them, but as an American I would rather see them on a boat or a plane headed to France.

 

[RX-178]

You guys are already helping me add details to the conecpt.


I don't think the victim filing suit on the rescuer is going to be a major problem. First of all, I most likely would not bother to wake up, grab my firearm and run down the block if they hadn't CALLED for help first. And they wouldn't call me for help if I hadn't given them my number for it.

 

[coloradokevin]

I wouldn't go so far as to form a "militia" of sorts, but I am always willing to look out for my neighbors.

I know a few of the folks that live by me (mostly retirees), and I have told them to give me a call if they ever need anything... They know what I do for a living, and know that I try to keep an eye on their place(s) for them.

This definitely seems most applicable in rural areas, where your response time is measured in half hour blocks, not the minutes that mine is!

Having said that, if Joe was actually Joanna, a single mom who wasn't educated about guns yet but who was trying to get up to speed, I'd be there in a heartbeat.

...


But as I said, if Joe is just a weenified poor excuse for a man who is unwilling to take any responsibility for his safety (or anyone else's), well...

To me, gender has little to do with this. I'd stand next to my wife in a gun fight before I'd stand with many men I know... An ability to defend yourself with a firearm knows no gender boundary. There is no reason that a female shouldn't/couldn't be just as capable as a man with a firearm. The "trying to get up to speed" thing applies equally to men, and women are at no disadvantage in shooting sports.

Whether or not I would help my neighbor wouldn't necessarily be determined by their gender or age, but more by their rapport with me (lets face it, I'm not going to jump into some mess for a neighbor I don't like... but I'm always willing to help a friend).

 

[SG1]

I agree with coloradokevin. Regardless of gender, age, etc., if I know my neighbor, and we are friendly, and they need my help, I'll gladly help them anyway I can.

I am not a LEO however. I can go over and help, but I can do little other than scare off someone. I'm not sure how most states would handle you killing to defend someone else's property. I think this was brought up a couple months ago about a TX man who shot someone breaking into his neighbor's house (can't remember the details).

I guess my point is, I would help any neighbor who needed it providing I am capable of helping. I wouldn't suggest they call me before calling 911 in an emergency though.

As a side note, I don't think "everyone" should own a gun just because they have the legal right to do so. If someone isn't comfortable with guns, it isn't going to help them and in some cases might even make the situation worse. In addition, some people are too stupid, reckless and/or careless to own a firearm. I don't think it's fair to say you wouldn't help a neighbor in trouble if said neighbor was a male between the ages of 21 and say 60 because he had his chance to own a firearm and didn't.

 

[bdickens]

Well, RX-178, if you told us where you live, you might be able to get a more informed answer. The laws in different states vary widely. What you can be all but given a parade downtown for in Texas would probably put you in prison in Massachusets.

 

[RX-178]

Well, in my own case, I can easily look up the laws myself, or ask any of a number of attorneys that I play pool with at the club.

I'm really just gathering input on the concept IF, WHEN and WHERE legal. I'd like to spread the concept around if it seems to be a viable one.

 

[Dravur]

I have...

been called several times by friend of mine when they were spooked. I have done checks on their homes or stayed with them when they were scared. I have also called the police when I thought it was necessary, even when nothing happened.

I'm not Batman, or even the Easter Bunny. But, when my friend's daughter was too scared to walk out to her car from work one night, I was happy to drive the few miles and walk her to her car. Nothing happened, and nothing probably would have happened, but she needed the reassurance.

When another friend ran out of gas at a 24 hour convenience store, but was scared to get out of her car, I came over and pumped the gas.

It's what you do for friends.

 

[jdc1244]

I live in a rural area where the idea has merit. Of course most everyone here has a firearm. In the event of a hurricane with the power out for a week or more everyone’s in agreement to come to the aid of a neighbor should the looters show up. The county deputies will have their hands full dealing with all the problems associated with a Storm; we’d be pretty much on our own anyway.

 

[B.D. Turner]

I would talk with an attorney or district attorney first. Coming to the aid of your neighbor is a noble cause but you need to cover yourself too.

 

[roo_ster]

A good neighbor called me one evening when he needed assistance. By the time I arrived, the perp had left, but I got there minutes before the cops (who did not dally, but they were not as close as I).

My wife was being followed by a road rager close to the house and she pulled behind that very same neighbor's house (after he had purchased and learned how to use firearms) and got his help dissuading the rager.

I think it is just getting to know your neighbors and lending them a hand when needed.

 

[buck00]

If you are a firearms owner that keeps home defense weapons at a constant state of readiness to defend your home and your person, and you are willing to use these weapons in the defense of your neighbors and friends, would it be reasonable to actually arrange for that?

No. I would be careful who you agree/commit to defend. I guess if they are really good friends, maybe, but I wouldn't try to create a commune-style collective security umbrella for the neighborhood. Sounds fun if you have too much time on your hands, but consider it in practice.

For example, let's say I'm very friendly with the neighbors. They know me, I know them. I keep a handgun with an underbarrel flashlight on the nightstand when I sleep, but the guy across the street (we'll just call him Joe) doesn't own firearms. I told Joe that if he's ever being burglarized, or suffers a home invasion, he can call me.

Again, on paper sounds good but consider you could be running across the street in your boxers at 3 am with a pistol, entering a house that possibly contains multiple armed intruders... and you'd have to clear the house and in the process distinguish bad guys from good guys. Not only could you be walking into a buzz saw but you could end up shooting your neighbor or his kids in the chaos. * Compare this scenario with simply defending your own home- where you are aware of the lay out, who is where, and you can stay at the top of the stairs and control the situation better. Night and day.

So here is the point: it would be much wiser to direct your efforts at taking "Joe" to the range, teaching him gun safety, getting him used to firearms, and encouraging him to invest in one to defend his own home.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Not bad but two "issues":

1. I'd prefer you not use the term "militia" - that is a very important concept - the term is reserved to refer to the whole body of the people of the U.S.A., as armed by the 2nd amendment and referred to by federal statute. Pick another name, please, to eliminate confusion - maybe "posse"?

2.

There are a myriad of reasons why someone may no longer have the legal right, no longer have the physical or mental capacity to use, or simply may not have the desire to keep the means of defending themselves and their home. In my view, none of this means that they deserve to be helpless.

The latter category - If they *choose* to not be armed, I say, spit on 'em - they deserve what they have planned and prepared for - that is, an untimely demise in the event of a violent aggressor while waiting on 911 - that is survival of the fittest - if we can eliminate a voting anti via a thug, then that's cause for celebration, not something to prevent. Sorry, I'm jaded about people who vote for people who take away from me the means to defend myself. Now, if, OTOH, they are defenseles due to mental or physical capacity, then that's a horse of a different color - so each member protected should be required to qualify for the protection by adequately explaining their reason for being a "DUP" - (deliberately unarmed person).

 

[IME]

For purposes of my post, I am assuming that a SHTF situation is playing out and you are not investigating the noise caused by some alley cat trying to make time with a kitty girlfriend in your neighbors backyard.

If several neighbors answer the summons at the same time, how would you know the good guys from the bad guys? I would presume you are responding covertly. Unless you are wired (eg walkie talkies) I could see bad things happening. Remember, if you are communicating but have not established visual contact with your fellow responders, you are not covert anymore.

Additionally, if the police arrive, how are THEY to tell the good guys from the bad guys?

I dunno, it's a good idea on paper, and should be pursued but SHTF situations always present unforeseen elements that have to be factored in. Maybe a friendly local LEO could give you some ideas.

Good luck.

<><Peace

 

[WayneConrad]

if we can eliminate a voting anti via a thug, then that's cause for celebration, not something to prevent.

I don't think that we should celebrate the death of any human. Not here, not anywhere. I'm guessing you meant to phrase that differently than you did.

 

[RX-178]

Well, the idea isn't that the whole neighborhood gets called up... I'm not even sure HOW that could be done, with all the different phone numbers...


The idea, and this is mostly just theory for the purpose of gathering input right now.... the idea is that they would have arranged beforehand who would be the best (based on proximity, personal preference, whatever... doesn't really matter at this point) to call in this situation.

And the theory is that the neighbor, with the proper firearms experience and training, will not only respond faster, but with familiarity of the house, and of the family inside, will be able to clear the structure faster, and with superior target identification.

 

[Fred Fuller]

First of all, it would go a lot better (and carry a lot less negative weight) if you'd leave off the "m word" even in parens. TPTB nationwide tend to look with quite a jaundiced eye upon folks who refer to themselves as such. You want to start out on the wrong foot with a political hotbutton issue, that'll probably do it for you.

Try 'neighborhood watch' instead, if you want to organize the neighborhood. Extra eyes looking out for the neighborhood and phones placing calls will do a lot to short-circuit problems before it's necessary for anyone to go to guns...

And if anyone in the neighborhood DOES want to learn to shoot, volunteer some range time to teach them. And help them pick out their own defensive firearm.

lpl/nc

 

[RX-178]

'Neighborhood Militia' is just what I chose in order to keep this concept distinct from the established concept of a Neighborhood Watch in discussion. It's not proposed to be the name of an actual organization or group.

The purpose of this thread is just to get input on this concept. It's not a statement of intent to organize one.

 

[Sans Authoritas]

PremiumSauces wrote:

1. I'd prefer you not use the term "militia" - that is a very important concept - the term is reserved to refer to the whole body of the people of the U.S.A., as armed by the 2nd amendment and referred to by federal statute. Pick another name, please, to eliminate confusion - maybe "posse"?

I disagree with the above idea on a few levels. The "militia" is any body of citizens who collectively fight any force, whether they are combating unjust riots perpetrated by their neighbors, or fighting any other body of armed aggressors. The militia was not "armed" by the Bill of Rights. It was mentioned so it could be protected against Federal intrusion. The use and arming of the militia of the several state governments was up to the states. The Militia Act of 1792 mandated a minimum of how the state militias were to be armed and organized. Arming and equipping the citizens was up to the individuals and to the local and state governments, until the state militia was federalized: and even then, they were federalized only with the permission of the state's governor.

As we've seen, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution have been, since about 1807, regarded as a quaint and decreasingly vivid memory: a joke brought up by politicians when they want to try to convince the electorate that they don't spit and wipe their feet on the documents on a daily basis. Which they do. And they might as well. The Bill of Rights doesn't protect anyone's rights from being infringed. Only the things people believe and their willingness to act on them protect rights from being infringed.

-Sans Authoritas

 

[goon]

I agree that a neighborhood watch is a good place to start. It would at least put the framework in place to see who actually gives a damn about keeping the community safe.
That tells you some things:
1. If this guy calls me, is it worth my effort to risk my own safety to go help him?
2. Who out of this group is also armed? Who among this group of armed people is not a raving idiot? Who is willing and able to come to my aid?

BTW - I wasn't referring to gender as much as mindset.
A single mom who isn't experienced enough to be comfortable with guns yet, an aging WWII vet who gave his only rifle to his son, or a soldier's wife who has to manage on her own - these people are all deserving of being helped.
OTOH, a soccer mom who called the cops on me for taking my Winchester to the car or the liberal blissninny who countered my assertion that it would be a good idea for him to arm himself with the statement "What would I use one of those for?" don't.

My basic point is that I'm just not willing to go get my head blown off for someone who doesn't deserve it.
It might seem selfish but it is what it is.

 

[hso]

I'm wondering if that's such a bad idea?

Yes

do you think this is a viable concept?

No


There are several problems with this idea, but since this is S&T (and you already admit that the legal problems are going to be legion [Man, that ain't half of it.]) let's just look at it from a practical perspective.

We constantly tell people to gather the family and fort up when they think an intruder may be in their house. You can read all the threads on this and the reasons why, but suffice it to say it's suicide to go hunting gremlins in the dark in your house.

Hunting gremlins on someone else's property is ten times worse because you don't know it a tenth as well as your own. Hunting gremlins in someone else's home is a ten times worse than that. You have no "home field" advantage and you're on unfamiliar territory. Very complex unfamiliar territory. Heck you might shoot good old Joe or get shot by Joe's intruder. So it is ten times suicide, squared.

Do you have days of formal training to fall back on on how to clear a room? A house? A property? Do you have hours of practice per month on these tasks? Do you have a protective vest of sufficient quality to stop all handgun rounds? Self aid training to keep your life's blood from all leaking out from a gunshot or knife wound? Do you have the communications capability to call for help should you be shot or stabbed? If not, then why do you think you have what's needed to act like a one man SWAT team clearing "Joe's" house for him?

What you propose isn't a "neighborhood militia". It's one guy with an unrealistic idea of how difficult and dangerous this problem is. If you actually put together a neighborhood watch and approach Joe's place with a group making a lot of noise to drive off the BG in Joe's garage you'd be much better off. If you helped Joe put in an upgraded lock system and an alarm, he'd be better off.

I live in a small rural enclave where we all have firearms and some even are trained in their use and just these sort of "problems". We would call on each other first to approach a house as a group before we'd do it singly.

 

[Fred Fuller]

The purpose of this thread is just to get input on this concept

OK. Here's your input on the concept of forming a "neighborhood militia."

It's a genuinely bad idea. What part of BAD IDEA do you fail to understand? What part of law enforcement looking askance at any group embracing such an idea do you fail to understand?

Look. It's simple.

Go to http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/Mil...SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=4&item=mm and read the whole article.

Then go to http://www.splcenter.org/intel/?source=redirect&url=splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-index.html and look around.

These are the folks setting the political agenda on the term/concept/idea you want to embrace. These are the folks who are contracting to the FBI to provide "domestic intelligence" on nice little neighborhood groups like the one you want to think about setting up, in concept only of course.

THIS is what you want to get involved with, even given your artsy cutesy use of the 'concept' concept? Really?

I will tell you this. This thread only continues at the considerable forbearance of every moderator who sees it, and its life is precarious even so. Proceed with care from this point forward or this one's done.

lpl/nc