Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MyMission

(2,010 posts)
106. Militia has several definitions and has changed over time
Wed Sep 4, 2019, 01:35 AM
Sep 2019

1) A military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement regular army in an emergency
2) A military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities in opposition to a regular army
3) All able-bodied civilians eligible by law eligible for military service
That's from Oxford.

Wikipedia for Militia (United States) gives a history, and cites current codes.
"The current United States Code, Title 10 (Armed forces), section 246 (Militia: Composition and Classes), paragraph (a) states: "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."[57] Section 313 of Title 32 refers to persons with prior military experience. ("Sec. 313. Appointments and enlistments: age limitation (a) To be eligible for original enlistment in the National Guard, a person must be at least 17 years of age and under 45, or under 64 years of age and a former member of the Regular Army, Regular Navy, Regular Air Force, or Regular Marine Corps. To be eligible for reenlistment, a person must be under 64 years of age. (b) To be eligible for appointment as an officer of the National Guard, a person must – (1) be a citizen of the United States; and (2) be at least 18 years of age and under 64."

Clearly there are age limits, for joining initially and for being called. I read it as age 17-64.

US militia exists independently in each state. Just because some yahoo owns a gun, does not make them eligible or part of the militia. They must be Able bodied and within a certain age range. 65+ year Old (white) guys on oxygen, walkers, or unable to meet military/militia standards aren't eligible to join.

We can work with that. Sign up for the militia, or military, pass able bodied test, and one can own a gun without paying. But one should still get licensed to carry and have weapons registered. And if you're above or below the age limit, no right to automatically own gun for the purpose of serving in a militia as you're not eligible, despite your desire or misconceptions. But one can pay for registration, license and insurance if not eligible for your state militia. Selective service registration doesn't mean you're part of the militia or military. It means you can be called up and trained, to age 45 if you've never served.

So that would rule out a lot of rump supporters.

Thanks for leading me to look up this information!

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I'm Pro-Healthcare for All but there's no way I'm going to start giving colonoscopies. NightWatcher Sep 2019 #1
Bingo!! SHRED Sep 2019 #2
The OP question is meant to make a point, I suppose...I know, lets keep doing NOTHING Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #3
The reason we don't have gun control has nothing to do with what people want or do. NightWatcher Sep 2019 #6
And even if we put into law all gun laws under consideration, and enforce them, the vast majority Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #10
We have gun rights in our constitution the world does't wasupaloopa Sep 2019 #18
Nah, it only protects them in WELL REGULATED MILITIAS and Heller is unconstitutional Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #20
Well when are we going to have a liberal court? wasupaloopa Sep 2019 #21
We dont need a "liberal" court, we just need one not bought off by the NRA... Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #23
USSC decisions are the ultimate statement of what is Constitutional Mike_DuBois Sep 2019 #73
It was meant to point out widespread chickenhawkism and slacktivism friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #9
Chickenhawks, are YOU calling ME and anyone who wants to have guns removed Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #11
You want it done, have no intention of doing so yourself, but expect others to do it for you? friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #16
thanks for admitting you are personally attacking me Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #19
Post #16 is an accurate description of your stance on the issue, is it not? friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #22
Sillyness. tazkcmo Sep 2019 #102
The rest of the world does not protect gun rights wasupaloopa Sep 2019 #13
OUr constitution allows ONLY for guns in REGULATED MILITIAS and Heller is not constitutional Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #15
You and I agree on that wryter2000 Sep 2019 #36
If you get down to arguing semantics you're never going to make progrsss. PTWB Sep 2019 #95
Yeah, but you're not advocating mandatory colonoscopies... friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #4
Most people believe getting murderers, rapists and thieves off the streets is mandatory Sugarcoated Sep 2019 #50
Sophistry Hekate Sep 2019 #66
Thread winner!! DanTex Sep 2019 #100
You speak for me. tazkcmo Sep 2019 #101
Who says guns would be confiscated by individuals.. TheCowsCameHome Sep 2019 #5
I wont stand for it HERE, I wont be called a chickenhawk HERE Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #12
I dunno. I've seen a few dozen posts 'round here say it Mike_DuBois Sep 2019 #74
Who said we have to confiscate? PSPS Sep 2019 #7
That has worked! Newest Reality Sep 2019 #57
IRL- insure, register and license firearms as we do motor vehicles MyMission Sep 2019 #68
Excellent! Newest Reality Sep 2019 #69
You know, that is Newest Reality Sep 2019 #71
IRL MyMission Sep 2019 #83
As long as you cann do it at no cost to gun owers Mike_DuBois Sep 2019 #75
Gun owners should pay for the privilege, like car owners MyMission Sep 2019 #84
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2019 #89
Please highlight the word "privilege" discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2019 #99
Militia has several definitions and has changed over time MyMission Sep 2019 #106
The militia: discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2019 #107
We don't Want to confiscate guns. wasupaloopa Sep 2019 #8
Are you suggesting that civilians should go door to door to confiscate guns? mcar Sep 2019 #14
Worse, he is saying since I am not willing to do it I am a CHICKENHAWK Eliot Rosewater Sep 2019 #17
You want it done, will not do so yourself- but expect *others* to go in harm's way for your beliefs friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #27
that's the ticket, have untrained civilians volunteer G_j Sep 2019 #93
Post on the internet sarisataka Sep 2019 #24
I know- the subject tends to bring out a lot of 'inner Trumps, Boltons, and Cheneys' friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #31
Like you! ChubbyStar Sep 2019 #62
LMAO. Why do gunners always ask this question? Fact is, there is no need to confiscate them. Hoyt Sep 2019 #25
Feh. You'll do nothing to bring any of that about that *doesn't* involve a text-input device friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #30
Hopefully you'll wise up and turn your banned gunz in, no matter how hard it is on you. Hoyt Sep 2019 #32
What are 'banned gunz', and what makes you think I have any to "turn...in"? friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #37
LMAO. I know, the Gungeoneers used to say if there were a ban, they'd say "they were transporting Hoyt Sep 2019 #42
Post removed Post removed Sep 2019 #46
I'm not a cop qazplm135 Sep 2019 #26
I have no problem James48 Sep 2019 #28
I disagree. AR15s, hi cap mags, etc., are fueling today's gun market. They were banned once, Hoyt Sep 2019 #40
Did you mean seconds? PTWB Sep 2019 #97
Oh, yes. Thanks. Corrected it. Hoyt Sep 2019 #98
Umm...they were banned and illegal procon Sep 2019 #45
They were not banned or illegal madville Sep 2019 #92
When my coworkers ask me what I did on Labor Day Cirque du So-What Sep 2019 #29
There are plenty of people who want those jobs wryter2000 Sep 2019 #33
Vote for politicians who would pass laws that would enable law enforcement to confiscate them. pnwmom Sep 2019 #34
Australia had a very successful buy back in the late '90s when they had a mass shooting. brush Sep 2019 #35
New Zealand is on track to reduce their supply of guns by 5% by year's end friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #43
I used to be a cop when dinosaurs roamed the earth, but I doubt any reluctant gun owner Vinca Sep 2019 #38
As far as rhetorical questions go -- give me a minute procon Sep 2019 #39
what? eShirl Sep 2019 #41
I do not believe that door to door confiscation will work no matter who is doing it. Needless dameatball Sep 2019 #44
"The last thing we need is some self-appointed vigilantes..." Vigilantes like this guy? friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #55
Your reductio ad absurdum is, if nothing else, most consistent. LanternWaste Sep 2019 #91
Enlist UN troops from Central America jpak Sep 2019 #47
Absolutely nothing, except for voting and supporting anti-gun candidates... TreasonousBastard Sep 2019 #48
We might not have to confiscate guns if we do as Chris Rock suggested. Make bullets expensive. alwaysinasnit Sep 2019 #49
Cool! Your local undocumented pharmecutical wholesalers would *love* his idea! friendly_iconoclast Sep 2019 #59
Give Trump a commission/bounty for every one confiscated. keithbvadu2 Sep 2019 #51
LOL, ok! nt USALiberal Sep 2019 #52
I don't own a pair of jackboots. Too old to be a thug. OilemFirchen Sep 2019 #53
Fire that's an absurd question- guns are not going to be confiscated. I do have an idea though. underpants Sep 2019 #54
Dumb question jberryhill Sep 2019 #56
Let's start with requiring all guns be registered. PoindexterOglethorpe Sep 2019 #58
Solution - NRA/gun orgs sell liability insurance... keithbvadu2 Sep 2019 #63
That is a bad argument. Eko Sep 2019 #60
Happily turn in my own two guns obamanut2012 Sep 2019 #61
What's preventing you from doing so now? Marengo Sep 2019 #103
Support candidates and policies that bring about change mokawanis Sep 2019 #64
Why do you think I want to confiscate guns? Crunchy Frog Sep 2019 #65
Traditionally you start with family and friends. hunter Sep 2019 #67
make the ammo and reloading powder very hard to get. Let them keep theirs guns. Hotler Sep 2019 #70
I'm also not willing to be a prison guard. Iggo Sep 2019 #72
Is it the job of every citizen to enforce the laws? guillaumeb Sep 2019 #76
I would be only willing to oblige the MyNameGoesHere Sep 2019 #77
Game on. Entrer Player One Mike_DuBois Sep 2019 #80
No new gun laws DVRacer Sep 2019 #78
Well golly gee! All these gun owners are so stable and law-abiding. Why ever would I fear Maru Kitteh Sep 2019 #79
I would not confiscate the weapons, just make them illegal and offer a buy back program. ooky Sep 2019 #81
No one is going to try to confiscate guns! GulfCoast66 Sep 2019 #82
I pay my taxes meadowlander Sep 2019 #85
We start with a national registration... Joe941 Sep 2019 #86
de-REC! nt Celerity Sep 2019 #87
You don't need to confiscate them. roamer65 Sep 2019 #88
oh yes we do! Joe941 Sep 2019 #104
I loudly proclaim the mail should get through, I studiously avoid volunteering to deliver the mail LanternWaste Sep 2019 #90
Vote uponit7771 Sep 2019 #94
Pass a law to confiscate all guns that are found on the street on in public. kentuck Sep 2019 #96
i don't think all guns should be confiscated rampartc Sep 2019 #105
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»On guns, a question: What...»Reply #106