On the BOR, 2nd Amendment and Incorporation

[jimmy the one]

52. rev war & colonial militias were inefficient

jmg: In 1789, the Constitutional Militias were very well defined entities. They were the Militia of the Several States.

Right. And Washington & many others including Nathaniel Greene thought the states militias in the rev-war were incompetent baboons, inclined to run away & desert when british regulars appeared. In the battle of long island, brooklyn & manhattan, 8,000 militia started out but only about 2,000 were left at campaign's end, often taking their issued musket with.

These Militias existed. They were not something left to be created from broadcloth. Nor were they were something to be recreated at the whim of the govt. The well regulated militia existed before the constitution. And THEY were THE militia declared necessary.

No, colonial & rev-war well regulated militias were NOT the rule of thumb. They tended to be sloppy, indifferent, sometimes arrogant, incompetent & inefficient. That is what the 2ndA tried to correct, the inequities from prior colonial militias & rev-war militias. 2ndA intent was to create a new militia system due the failures of the past militia systems. The british did not allow carte blanche firearms ownership to people prior to 1775, for one thing there were scant muskets to go around, & ineffective they were. And militias were subject to the crown as well, & we've seen that the british considered the 'have arms' decree incumbent upon belonging to militia.

Yes, yes, the people made the constituional Militia of the several States, as existed and were defined at the time of the constitution, obsolete - I understand all that.
So yes, the National Guard is the current day well regulated Militia...it serves that role, and others.
But is has only a slight resemblance to the State Militias as recognized and deemed necessary in the Constitution. And as provided for exactly as they were understood in the 1st Miltia Acts.
Anyway - what's the point you are trying to make?

What was the point I - I - I was trying to make? what's YOURS?
.. the national gds do NOT have to provide their own weapons to enlist, that's absurd.
.. there IS no well regulated citizens militia today, something which was mandated by the 2ndA. A citizens right to keep & bear arms today has NOTHING to do with maintenance of the national guards, especially when federalized.
.. there IS a powerful standing army, as well as a powerful floating navy & flying air force, which a citizens militia was supposed to guard against.
.. the UNorganized militia of everyone over 17 who does'nt belong to the national guards, is, by definition of unorganized, not 'well regulated', and thus fails the 2ndA litmus test.

.. So explain why the 2ndA isn't obsolete, as you say?