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
 

zippythepinhead

(374 posts)
42. FYI
Fri Dec 16, 2016, 02:06 PM
Dec 2016

Militia in the decades following ratification

Ketland brass barrel smooth bore pistol common in Colonial America
During the first two decades following the ratification of the Second Amendment, public opposition to standing armies, among Anti-Federalists and Federalists alike, persisted and manifested itself locally as a general reluctance to create a professional armed police force, instead relying on county sheriffs, constables and night watchmen to enforce local ordinances.[64] Though sometimes compensated, often these positions were unpaid—held as a matter of civic duty. In these early decades, law enforcement officers were rarely armed with firearms, using billy clubs as their sole defensive weapons.[64] In serious emergencies, a posse comitatus, militia company, or group of vigilantes assumed law enforcement duties; these individuals were more likely than the local sheriff to be armed with firearms.[64] On May 8, 1792, Congress passed "[a]n act more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States" requiring:
[E]ach and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia...[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.[119]
The act also gave specific instructions to domestic weapon manufacturers "that from and after five years from the passing of this act, muskets for arming the militia as herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound."[119] In practice, private acquisition and maintenance of rifles and muskets meeting specifications and readily available for militia duty proved problematic; estimates of compliance ranged from 10 to 65 percent.[120] Compliance with the enrollment provisions was also poor. In addition to the exemptions granted by the law for custom-house officers and their clerks, post-officers and stage drivers employed in the care and conveyance of U.S. mail, ferrymen, export inspectors, pilots, merchant mariners and those deployed at sea in active service; state legislatures granted numerous exemptions under Section 2 of the Act, including exemptions for: clergy, conscientious objectors, teachers, students, and jurors. And though a number of able-bodied white men remained available for service, many simply did not show up for militia duty. Penalties for failure to appear were enforced sporadically and selectively.[121] None is mentioned in the legislation.[119]

The Model 1795 Musket was made in the U.S. and used in the War of 1812
The first test of the militia system occurred in July 1794, when a group of disaffected Pennsylvania farmers rebelled against federal tax collectors whom they viewed as illegitimate tools of tyrannical power.[122] Attempts by the four adjoining states to raise a militia for nationalization to suppress the insurrection proved inadequate. When officials resorted to drafting men, they faced bitter resistance. Forthcoming soldiers consisted primarily of draftees or paid substitutes as well as poor enlistees lured by enlistment bonuses. The officers, however, were of a higher quality, responding out of a sense of civic duty and patriotism, and generally critical of the rank and file.[64] Most of the 13,000 soldiers lacked the required weaponry; the war department provided nearly two-thirds of them with guns.[64] In October, President George Washington and General Harry Lee marched on the 7,000 rebels who conceded without fighting. The episode provoked criticism of the citizen militia and inspired calls for a universal militia. Secretary of War Henry Knox and Vice-President John Adams had lobbied Congress to establish federal armories to stock imported weapons and encourage domestic production.[64] Congress did subsequently pass "[a]n act for the erecting and repairing of Arsenals and Magazines" on April 2, 1794, two months prior to the insurrection.[123] Nevertheless, the militia continued to deteriorate and twenty years later, the militia's poor condition contributed to several losses in the War of 1812, including the sacking of Washington, D.C., and the burning of the White House in 1814.[121]
Scholarly commentary

























Recommendations

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

Yes, and it will include women this time greymattermom Dec 2016 #1
Better not unless they quickly pass the ERA. nt DURHAM D Dec 2016 #3
Supreme Court 14th amendment rulings have surpassed the ERA long ago. former9thward Dec 2016 #7
while the 14th Amendment at times has been interpreted to benefit women, it offers them no assurance LanternWaste Dec 2016 #18
Yup. n t Laffy Kat Dec 2016 #26
Enough political capital to reinstate a draft will also mean enough to include women without having Warren DeMontague Dec 2016 #61
You mean create a new one? "THE" ERA is long dead. Thor_MN Dec 2016 #69
Some argue otherwise. DURHAM D Dec 2016 #72
I agree, there should be equal rights for everyone, but it is your point that is off point. Thor_MN Dec 2016 #73
Mostly the same people who join now will sign up-- Those who Hoyt Dec 2016 #2
Spoken like a man who has fuck-all experience in the military. linuxman Dec 2016 #8
Way to shit on the armed forces. I know many who serve honorably and who are not xenophobes NightWatcher Dec 2016 #9
Thanks Jersey Devil Dec 2016 #15
Don't know about your son-in-law, but some of the vilest insults I've heard about Muslims Hoyt Dec 2016 #44
No. Military supported george war bush, polls show they support Trump, and Hoyt Dec 2016 #19
A surprisingly large amount enlist to get money for school. Calculating Dec 2016 #23
We need to change that. Killing for school ought not to be their only option. Hoyt Dec 2016 #28
That is a sad truth etherealtruth Dec 2016 #66
This message was self-deleted by its author Jake Stern Dec 2016 #31
The post you responded to is not in conflict with yours. Lil Missy Dec 2016 #33
I responded to a post calling troops racists and xenophobes NightWatcher Dec 2016 #56
My but you do go to great lengths to read SO MUCH more into comments Lil Missy Dec 2016 #68
You think THAT'S insulting? resistance2016 Dec 2016 #64
As a lifelong Democratic sarisataka Dec 2016 #67
Wow Calculating Dec 2016 #12
I can't begin to express my disgust at your besmirching my family and friends SQUEE Dec 2016 #16
The bar to enlist is not tough, don't kid yourself. I know several kids who Hoyt Dec 2016 #25
Flag on the play sarisataka Dec 2016 #34
Drugs and juvenile delinquency type stuff. I know darn well it happens. Hoyt Dec 2016 #37
take their problem kids and put them in military school. SQUEE Dec 2016 #43
Drug charges are the hardest convictions sarisataka Dec 2016 #49
Do you not get the Judge is giving the kid a choice -- go to trial and get convicted or join Hoyt Dec 2016 #57
And again SQUEE Dec 2016 #36
I took the test, my cat could have passed it too. Hoyt Dec 2016 #38
8 years ago is not recent. SQUEE Dec 2016 #41
Oh, the kid being told to join the military is like 5 years ago. Hoyt Dec 2016 #47
nice strawman. SQUEE Dec 2016 #50
So did you join up, or would you have, after bush invaded and killed thousands Hoyt Dec 2016 #53
I joined the Army under Poppy Bush SQUEE Dec 2016 #70
Daddy bush really wasn't that bad, but he shouldn't have killed quite so many Innocent Iraqis. Hoyt Dec 2016 #71
What a pathetic post, applying your usual broad brush attack against those in the military Lurks Often Dec 2016 #24
Another gunner promoting the MIC, not surprising. Hoyt Dec 2016 #39
Please reconsider this statement. HassleCat Dec 2016 #29
That's your prerogative. Are you in the category I described? If not, don't fret. Hoyt Dec 2016 #40
Yes, I am in the category. HassleCat Dec 2016 #46
That's obvious. My question was were you brought Hoyt Dec 2016 #48
Your initial post made a pretty sweeping generalization. HassleCat Dec 2016 #58
Are you denying SOME people join the military for guns, bombs, glory, and all that BS. Hoyt Dec 2016 #59
I was in from 1972 to 1978. HassleCat Dec 2016 #60
That's a commendable explanation. Navy was my preference too, well after the Coast Guard said I Hoyt Dec 2016 #63
Your autocorrect is seriously dorked. KamaAina Dec 2016 #52
The apparatus remains in place gratuitous Dec 2016 #4
The future is hopeless. deaniac21 Dec 2016 #5
Indeed Calculating Dec 2016 #11
Unlikely. Current warfare doesn't really involve the MineralMan Dec 2016 #6
Not so sure our military has outgrown the need for large numbers of warm bodies. Girard442 Dec 2016 #10
That's a good point, but the sheer number of people MineralMan Dec 2016 #20
I remember an interview years ago with a General or someone like that meadowlark5 Dec 2016 #32
IOW, the military doesn't want or need cannon fodder. DinahMoeHum Dec 2016 #45
my son turned 18 last Saturday 0rganism Dec 2016 #13
Your son is not going to be drafted Lurks Often Dec 2016 #27
and Donald Trump will definitely never be president, right? 0rganism Dec 2016 #30
Anybody who posted that Trump had a chance was ignored, mocked and alerted on. Lurks Often Dec 2016 #51
I think there are a lot of young, male fools out there who think Warpy Dec 2016 #14
Really? You think all who enlist are "fools" out for "glory"? (nt) Jersey Devil Dec 2016 #17
Hardly. I do think many of the ones looking for a fight under Twittler are Warpy Dec 2016 #21
Not this nonsense again Lurks Often Dec 2016 #22
I was in the army during 1964 thru 1967 zippythepinhead Dec 2016 #35
FYI zippythepinhead Dec 2016 #42
The US may have to. We are being cyber attacked by Russia, which is making moves on Europe... Hekate Dec 2016 #54
Maybe all of those sarisataka Dec 2016 #55
No. Warren DeMontague Dec 2016 #62
I hope so dumbcat Dec 2016 #65
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are we going to reinstate...»Reply #42