Thoughts

Status
Not open for further replies.
That sounds a lot like a self-organized "militia," or a non-official police force. There is no legal sanction for a self-organized militia, especially regarding any collective actions it may take. Collective actions necessarily surpass normal individual self defense. But unarmed "neighborhood watch" type arrangements are not a problem. The problems arise when the shooting starts. Can you get all the members officially deputized?

I would not rule this out entirely. I'm saying to be very careful in how you organize this.
 
One group of angry protestors and rioters vs small heavily armed group? Sounds like a good recipe for bad. What will you do, patrol in your neighborhood while your wife and baby are at home alone? That's not your job now nor should it be your focus. Wife and baby, sole focus. Forget working the militia, family first.

My recommendation, 3/4 plywood cut n ready with screws on hand for boarding up windows and doors, spray paint for stern warnings. Radio coms for trustworthy neighbors nearby in event of someone's life/property in danger. Let video cams monitor the mayhem while you have rifle, mags, web gear ready safely inside. A busted mailbox or damaged auto is not worth risking your freedom. If this was a reality in my area unless I was single, I'd move.
 
In my personal opinion, I think you need to be very careful how you approach this.

If the idea is to have solid relations with your neighbors, and some sort of plan to work together if the need ever arose to do so, I think that's fine. Making sure you all have each other's contact information, and the ability to cooperate under adverse circumstances could be beneficial. And a neighborhood watch, would also be a good idea.

What would not be considered appropriate in my eyes, would be "policing" the neighborhood; running tactical drills; or spending excessive time working on plans and procedures. Defining actionable events and use of force, and requiring uniforms or gear minimums would also be a no-go.

That's just my two cents.
 
This is a terrible idea and really only feasible if there is a total breakdown of society. According to this, Wisconsin has no specific statute authorizing or regulating citizens arrest.
http://www.johnsflaherty.com/blog/how-to-perform-a-citizens-arrest-and-why-its-best-not-to
Wisconsin doesn’t actually have a specific statute regarding citizen’s arrests, but such arrests are covered by common law or judge-made law. Those laws allow citizens to make arrests under one of two conditions.

The first is when a citizen has probable cause to believe that the person they are arresting has committed a felony. An example would be if you are standing outside a bank and someone with a mask comes out of the building with a bag of money. That gives you enough reason to believe that the person committed a felony.

The second is when someone witnesses a misdemeanor and the misdemeanor is a breach of the peace. That means you can’t arrest someone for public intoxication alone, but you can arrest someone for public intoxication if they’re throwing punches or objects at people.

There is, however, one exception to the latter. Merchants may perform a citizen’s arrest when they witness a misdemeanor even if it doesn’t breach peace. That allows them to detain shoplifters.
Click to expand...

So you are starting off on shaky legal ground. Even if you get the necessary legal training to know what the elements of each crime are and which ones are felonies and which are misdemeanors, you have no civil protection like a peace officer does. Wisconsin law provides this protection for peace officers:
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/968/07
6m) Officer immunity. A law enforcement officer is immune from civil and criminal liability arising out of a decision by the officer to arrest or not arrest an alleged offender, if the decision is made in a good faith effort to comply with this section.
There are no such protections for private citizens. You could conceivably be criminally charged and you could certainly be sued in civil court.

Then there is the public relations nightmare this will turn into. Word gets out that a group of citizens is organizing to defend their neighborhood is going to be news. Don't think you can keep this a secret. The ability to keep a secret is directly proportionate to the number of people who know the secret. Family members will know, someone will mention it to someone else and the next thing you know you have a local reporter sniffing around for the story that's going to get them into a bigger market and it's going to be about your neighborhood vigilance committee or militia. I can't find any Wisconsin law barring paramilitary training, but once word gets out you are certain to draw the attention of local law enforcement.

I'd say talking to your neighbors about coming to each other's aid is fine. Organizing and training for the day you have to is getting into an area you'd probably rather not be in.
 
How is what he is proposing, any different from a church or private school running drills and getting advanced training? Everyone there (unless there are some LEO's in the group) are citizens without the legal protection of peace officer contracts. So the same could be said about those groups?

I'm not disagreeing with anyone here just posing the question.
 
American_Fusilier said:
What is wrong with a self-organized militia? Why do you say there is no legal sanction for a self organized militia? Speaking on a tangent: We the people have the right to organize in a militia, correct? We don't need anybody's permission. Otherwise that would ruin the whole reason for the militia in the first place.
Click to expand...
This is completely wrong. The militia was always part of the government. The first law codifying the organization of the militia after independence was the Militia Act of 1792. You can read the text of it here. https://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm In most states there are still laws on the books providing for the governor to command the militia and appoint the officers under him. Any adhoc group you formed would not be the militia established by federal and state law no matter what you called it.

American_Fusilier said:
But I wasn't really talking about policing or arresting people. More like, "oh crap! I need help RIGHT NOW".
Click to expand...
What were you planning on doing, shooting them all? That's a seriously bad idea. Are you planning on blocking access into your neighborhood and then defending that barricade? Seriously, the best thing you can do in a civil unrest situation is to gather up your loved ones and get out of the affected area. You have insurance for the property damage.
 
Jeff White said:
This is completely wrong. The militia was always part of the government. The first law codifying the organization of the militia after independence was the Militia Act of 1792. You can read the text of it here. https://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm In most states there are still laws on the books providing for the governor to command the militia and appoint the officers under him. Any adhoc group you formed would not be the militia established by federal and state law no matter what you called it.

What were you planning on doing, shooting them all? That's a seriously bad idea. Are you planning on blocking access into your neighborhood and then defending that barricade? Seriously, the best thing you can do in a civil unrest situation is to gather up your loved ones and get out of the affected area. You have insurance for the property damage.
Click to expand...

No, not shooting them all. Did I ever mention that? I don't want to hurt anybody! But I don't want my family to be hurt more. I asked this question to hear people's thoughts, not to be patronized or chastised! So respectfully, please take it down a notch.

Shooting everybody is not what I am talking about. I am not forming anything be it a group, militia, or some kind of citizen police force... This was a hypothetical question. Nothing that I mentioned in the OP is actually happening, except being asked by my neighbors. I wanted to hear people's thoughts about a couple of neighbors helping each other out. Not committing any crimes or massacres.


However, I respectfully disagree on your interpretation of the 1792 Militia Act.

The 2nd Amendment supersedes the militia act of 1792. "A well regulated (meaning well trained) Militia (the people), being necessary to the security of a free State (national, state, or local), the right of the people (individually or as a group) to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

We don't need permission to buy guns or ammo, we don't need permission to practice, or practice together. Plus, part of being "well regulated" is being well trained. It is our birthright as Americans to form militias or whatever you want to call it, for the common defense of the country, our rights, our communities.

But again.... This is not at all what my original question was about at all. We're veering into a discussion that is separate from what I was originally asking about.
 
earlthegoat2 said:
I know it’s not the same as civil unrest but when neighborhood watch gets brought up, all I can think of right now is George Zimmerman.
Click to expand...

... and by extension, how the neighbors he kept safe in their beds, for years, threw him to the wolves, at the first whiff of trouble. How would your neighbors react, when you need their support most ? Are you sure ?
 
I am sorry I asked about a stupid hypothetical concept. I honestly didn't realize some people were going to respond as if I were in the middle of operating this way in reality.

We can drop it and move on, I'll just stay out of this area of the forum from now on... I don't know how to delete my post, but if I could, I would.
 
Last edited:
American_Fusilier said:
The 2nd Amendment supersedes the militia act of 1792. "A well regulated (meaning well trained) Militia (the people), being necessary to the security of a free State (national, state, or local), the right of the people (individually or as a group) to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

We don't need permission to buy guns or ammo, we don't need permission to practice, or practice together. Plus, part of being "well regulated" is being well trained. It is our birthright as Americans to form militias or whatever you want to call it, for the common defense of the country, our rights, our communities.
Click to expand...

Good luck with using that defense in court. The militia is part of the government, the Militia act of 1792 was amended in 1795, 1862 and 1903. Many states still maintain a militia sometimes updated to State Guard in addition to their National Guard for the purpose of defending the state of providing disaster assistance in the event that their guard units are on federal duty when insurrection or riots start.

28 states have laws against private groups conducting military training. There is also a provision in the USA Patriot Act that prohibits providing training or support for terrorists. The problem is, a terrorist is whoever the government decides it is.

One of the few Supreme Court decisions on the 2d Amendment prior to Heller was a case from Chicago on exactly the issue you mention, an armed group parading with their arms. It was kind of a silly case of a group wanting to parade with their weapons, the state said no, it got the Supreme Court and they lost.....because they weren’t the militia.

American_Fusilier said:
I am sorry I asked about a stupid hypothetical concept. I honestly didn't realize some people were going to respond as if I were in the middle of operating this way in reality.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry, but what kind of answers were you expecting? We deal in reality here in ST&T. If you ask a question here, you’re going to get serious replies.

There is nothing wrong with a group of friends getting together and shooting, or even setting up scenarios to train on. You start getting into a lot of legal gray areas when you talk about organizing that group of friends in a defense force.
 
You asked for people's thoughts. They gave them to you.

I say don't ask the question if you really don't want the answer. If you do, you better put on your big boy pants and suck it up when you hear things you don't want to hear.

Lots of very thoughtful contributors here freely give sound, reasoned advice. Based on years of experience. Based on professional expertise. And give it for free.
 
This is America, a county founded on rebellion and the bearing of arms. We don't need anyone's permission. Least of all the govt's.

Just because the govt says it's ok doesn't mean it's right. The govt says it's ok for a woman to kill her baby in utero. That is not ok, but it is legal. Sometimes laws are inconsistent with the constitution, when that happens they are null and void. And it is our duty to disobey such laws.

But all of this is moot anyway. As it wasn't even related to my initial question anyways! I haven't broken any laws or even conspired to. I just asked a question.

Please don't patronize me. I asked a question, and the first 5 responses gave me exactly what I was looking for.

Then I got an unsolicited and unrealated history lesson, followed by insulting me by insinuating that my plan was to "shoot everyone". Give me a break...

Thank you for all the professional expertise.
 
Last edited:
American_Fusilier said:
Please just delete this whole post
Click to expand...
I didn't see this thread till you had already deleted the OP, but I got an idea of what you were getting at from some of the responses. You have to recognize that this forum is just not the place to discuss certain things (actually, there are some things that shouldn't be discussed on any online forums). There are other forums more open to to the type of subject matter you were talking about here.
 
<*(((>< said:
How is what he is proposing, any different from a church or private school running drills and getting advanced training? Everyone there (unless there are some LEO's in the group) are citizens without the legal protection of peace officer contracts. So the same could be said about those groups?

I'm not disagreeing with anyone here just posing the question.
Click to expand...
A security group for a house of worship is more similar to hiring paid security guards, except in a house of worship the guards are typically volunteers. Even in Cali it is legal to be armed on any premises where you have the owner's (or board of directors, or clergy, whoever has authority) permission. That is different from patrolling around your neighborhood.
 
My parents lived in Los Angeles area during the Rodney King riot where law and order went out the window temporarily and gangs/criminals ruled the streets. My parents and neighbors in their street met and decided to barricade the ends of the street with cars parked close so you barely could squeeze through and posted signs that said, "Home owners of this street are armed" and posted armed neighbors 24/7 at both ends of the street. While other streets were looted and robbed, gang members riding around in low riders approached the street but when they saw armed neighbors, they drove off and none of the houses/neighbors were harmed.
Jeff White said:
There is nothing wrong with a group of friends getting together and shooting, or even setting up scenarios to train on.
Click to expand...
Before we moved to our retirement location, we lived in a high crime city of central valley. When home invasion robberies and burglaries increased for our streets, neighbors from several streets met under the "Neighborhood Watch Program" sponsored by city police department. When the police told them the realities of crime and the city's crime map (there was no longer "safe" part of city), it was immediately unanimous that all the neighbors wanted to be armed and trained to protect themselves and became supporters of gun rights and 2A. Since then, I have taken countless neighbors, their families/relatives, friends and coworkers to the range and helped train them in defensive shooting techniques with much of ammunition donated as my "Pay It Forward" contribution.

When we moved to our rural retirement location at the end of a quiet private road, we met with the neighbors and thankfully most are hunters with clear understanding of the Second Amendment. We have an understanding with the neighbors how things may go down under "emergency" situations to defend the neighborhood. Since we all know the nearby neighbors and their cars very well, any strange cars/people are approached and inquired whether they are lost or casing the street to steal later (which has happened and there is the element of homeless crowd we keep an eye open for). Anything new/strange that happens, we alert the neighbors so they too can stay up to date and keep a look out.

I am a realist and natural disasters like hurricanes have made some areas of the country without law and order in the past and during this time, it is up to the neighbors to defend their lives/households until law enforcement/military can re-establish law and order. I am not sure whether the OP was discussing something similar since it's been deleted but I see no issues with neighbors getting together to shoot and train together for times of emergencies. Like neighborhood block party, it could establish togetherness sentiment of neighbors.
 
Last edited:
That's a whole lot different than trying to establish some kind of organized neighborhood militia or wannabe police force.
 
bearcreek said:
What kind of militia do you think the second amendment is talking about?
Click to expand...

It’s talking about the militia that is part of the government. The Second Amendment doesn’t authorize private armies. It provides for the population to be armed so that they may be mobilized in defense of the nation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
onehanded shooting
2
Replies
31
Views
898
riverdog
R
K
  • Locked
Is Collecting Presses A Hobby
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
IROCZ
I
H
  • Locked
50YDS with the CZ452 (Picture Problem)
Replies
10
Views
698
back40
B
T
  • Locked
Police tells me, it's my job to protect myself, they are useless..
Replies
18
Views
1K
Sven
S
S
  • Locked
Armed Pilots - Humor
Replies
3
Views
805
BluesBear
B
Back
Top