Those with guns can go fight ISIS

[kidicarus13]

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/let...forebell<br />

In these dangerous times, it’s good to know America has a secret army that is armed, ready and able to serve — even if they don’t know it yet.

Official data show that there are an estimated 40 million U.S. gun owners who are of military age, and who could be drafted and sent to fight ISIS in Syria or elsewhere.


The Census Bureau says we have about 125 million people between ages 20 and 50, and the best estimates are that about one person in three in America is armed. Even if half of those were drafted and sent to Syria, that would constitute an overwhelming force of at least 20 million people.


Most gun owners know they have a constitutional right to “keep and bear arms,” but they may not realize the government also has a constitutional right to draft them to serve in the country’s defense.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep arms to maintain a “well-regulated militia” for the security of the state, meaning a force of citizen-soldiers that the federal government can send into battle. Anyone availing themselves of the right to keep and bear arms is thereby making themselves available for the militia.

Presumably the National Rifle Association is reminding its members of that fact right now.

While there is some debate about whether the right to keep and bear arms applies only when serving in the militia, no one disputes that it at least applies when serving.

The idea of drafting gun owners and sending them to war might sound controversial today, but it would not be to the Founding Fathers. It’s exactly what they recommended. They believed in citizen-soldiers rather than a professional army. Indeed, that’s the whole point of the second amendment — a point that often is conveniently forgotten when the subject comes up.

What the Founding Fathers meant by a “well-regulated militia” is not open to serious dispute, as they spelled it out in their writings at the time. They meant a properly trained, ordered and disciplined military force, but one consisting of part-time citizen-soldiers rather than professionals. It’s effectively what we call the National Guard today.

You could argue that the Second Amendment has worked as planned. Thanks to its provisions, the United States is the most heavily armed country on the planet. There are nearly 300 million guns in private hands, including hundreds of thousands of assault weapons and even sub-machine guns. Never has a country had such an army of private citizens armed and ready to fight. Surely, George Washington would be proud.

Requiring all gun owners between, say, 18 and 50 to register with Selective Service, and make themselves available for basic training and overseas deployment to Syria, could be a smart move for President Obama.

At the very least, he could require registration from everyone who owns a semi-automatic assault weapon such as an AK-47. Why not? What sort of patriotic American owns an AK-47 and high-capacity clips and yet refuses to answer his country’s call when asked?

According to the federal government, there are more than half a million machine guns registered in private hands in the U.S., 300,000 short-barreled shotguns and rifles, and over 2 million other high-potency weapons such as grenades, rockets and bombs. This doesn’t even include semiautomatic weapons.

In the past week, President Obama has come in for a lot of criticism for his supposedly “weak” response to the ISIS attacks in Paris. America is now teeming once again with armies of watercooler warriors and coffee-klatsch commandoes demanding strong, tough, bold action in the Middle East. Sending a few million of our most heavily armed citizens to Syria would be the boldest move imaginable.

What’s the use of having the most heavily armed population in human history if we can’t use them?

Many of America’s most aggressive hawks are presumably already armed, and have spent years practicing their marksmanship against doves, deer, ducks and other domestic enemies. This is a magnificent chance for them to put it into action against foreign enemies too.

Meanwhile, many of our gun owners have a surplus of aggression that needs an outlet. They manage to shoot and kill about 30 U.S. citizens every day, meaning we suffer our own “Paris attacks” every few days at the hands of a few of our own citizens. Why not deploy them against ISIS?

[encorehunter]

I have no problem defending our soil. Now you want to send me to another country? My luck, they wouldn't let me come back. I say we put the non gun owners up front for our first line defense, then we can back them up. They should make a good shield.

[ray1970]

That's possibly the worst disguised piece of anti-gun drivel I've seen in a while.

Here's all I got out of it....

Obama would be smart to make everyone who owns a firearm put their name into a database. Especially those who own "assault rifles".

Umm, no thanks.

Trying to dupe gun owners to agree to a national registration by appealing to the fact that a large percentage of them are patriots isn't going to work. Might trick a few of the bubba/inbred/redneck fudd types but I would hope most gun owners wouldn't be fooled by such a ruse.

[Bailey Guns]

That's possibly the worst disguised piece of anti-gun drivel I've seen in a while.

I completely disagree. It wasn't disguised at all.

[cstone]

What I got from that article; "If you don't own a gun, you are not prepared to defend yourself, your family, your nation, and thereby could be considered unpatriotic and a coward." Rather than equate the unorganized citizen militia with the National Guard, I think of the militia as our country's "Home Guard." Normally I oppose government activity as feckless and wasteful, but I would support federal and state legislation that encouraged free citizens to obtain, improve, and train with modern weapons of war, in the event that they are called upon, formally or informally to defend themselves, innocent people, and other free citizens from tyranny, violence and terrorism, whether the source is foreign or domestic.

To then identify and register members of The Home Guard would be a felony as it would permit enemies to locate and target our last line of defense as a nation. We the People are the nation and our elected representatives should support and encourage our ability to provide for the common defense.

The author of the marketwatch article above is either a coward, ignorant, or unpatriotic. I don't rule out the possibility that the author is all three.

Be safe.

[BPTactical]

Wait, so the liberals want us to protect them?


Uhmmm, no........carry your own load.

[Scanker19]

Too bad title 10 section 311 says all males, not just gun owners. To include Brett or whatever his stupid name is.

[Gman]

Yeah, get all of the gun owners out of the country. They can't control their surplus aggression.

Another libtard that can't keep their fantasies to themself.

[wctriumph]

That was truly tragedy and comedy rolled into one piece of ignorance. The stupidity never ends.

[Great-Kazoo]

#1 yes it's a shitty write up with the usual crap thrown in. Not even a comments section to voice ones opinion, as usual

However

IF it was a matter of isis / islamist actively attacking the U.S. and there were no standing .mil

Would one not offer their services to keep the menace at bay, be it at home or abroad?
Unfortunately, by that time it would be more a localized fighting on U.S soil.


WE did have civilians offer their services to the .gov during the South East Asian War Games

In November 1965 Barger sent a letter to president Lyndon Johnson at the White House in support of the war in Vietnam: "I volunteer a group of loyal Americans for behind-the-line duty in Vietnam. We are available for training and duty immediately." Barger received a letter in response from an officer stating if they wanted to fight they would have to enlist in the army.

Barger and the Hells Angels made international headlines when a small group disrupted hundreds of anti-war protesters in Berkeley, California in 1965.