To the Editor: Worrying idea? 



To the Editor: 

From the 1700s through Jan. 6, our unorganized paramilitary groups have a poor track record of meeting the intent of “a well-regulated militia.” 

The next clause, “being necessary for the security of a free State,” makes it clear that risks were evident in the founders’ era, that states’ rights needed to be accommodated and secured. 

The “right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” drumbeat has created a powerful lobby, an accommodating arms industry, which together, and in concert with targeted political rhetoric, has driven many to focus solely on this clause, and to armor up. It has also empowered mentally unstable, largely lone wolves, to wreak havoc. 

Per the Constitution, Congress can provide for organizing, arming and disciplining militias. And for each state to appoint their officers and have the authority to train their militias within congressional guidelines. 

Not to the professional level, but with specific training, including attitudinal indoctrination, to systematically equip members with the tools needed to combat hate and discrimination, and to evaluate and critique online toxic propaganda. Each militia a team, promoting guardrails, watching for outliers. 

Members of the Armed Forces and the National Guard, relieved of active duty, get your militia card, and keep and bear. Citizens, until the signup is implemented, no changes to arms acquisition. After which, patriots must first join before arming. 

We’re worried about troubled citizens, medically or emotionally shaky. Militias would provide an inclusive environment, dedicated to our states and nation. Will there be incidents? No doubt. Problems will arise and adjustments needed. But with the right approach, those who may stray toward the fringes just may have comrades who, seeing troublesome signs, have “Got Your 6,” and raise a flag. 

The SCOTUS (5-4) ruling in the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm for self-defense, unconnected with militia service, minimized the first clauses, aka the prefatory. 

Why can’t Congress and each state implement the whole of the amendment? 

Perhaps the idea of militias is worrying? 

David Trigg 

Ellsworth 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.