2A question

[hollohas]

It's wasn't military. The feds in Portland are US Marshalls mostly and other Fed LEO agencies like DHS, CBP, FBI, Etc. They were not and are not military personnel.

[Irving]

I don't even like mailmen out on my streets.

[WETWRKS]

First...you are assigning the idea of "state run or controlled" to the term militia. The definition of militia as used in another document of that same era basically defined militia to be any able bodied male between the ages of x and y. There is nothing in the definition stating that they are under the control of a higher power nor does it require any level of training. The term well regulated can mean organized...but that doesn't require that the militia be under the control of the government...local, state, federal, or otherwise.

[Rucker61]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It is generally agreed that one of the purposes of a state run "Militia" is to defend against a tyrannical federal government, for example the beginnings of the revolution that bore our country.

When a leader unilaterally deploys federal military against american citizens, that sounds something like tyranny. Regardless of your taste for Trump's or anyone else's cool-aid. does this not raise your 2A alarm bells? It does mine and I've been surprised that this hasn't been discussed. Maybe I missed it.

Federal law enforcement were deployed, and if the governors oppose that and want to use the state militia to do so, then the governors should muster the state militia.

No one here is a state governor.

[x11]

First...you are assigning the idea of "state run or controlled" to the term militia. The definition of militia as used in another document of that same era basically defined militia to be any able bodied male between the ages of x and y. There is nothing in the definition stating that they are under the control of a higher power nor does it require any level of training. The term well regulated can mean organized...but that doesn't require that the militia be under the control of the government...local, state, federal, or otherwise.

States using Militias to object to federal tyranny is not my idea. This is James Madison's idea, per The Federalist, No 46. As I understand, they modeled 2A around the mechanics of how it worked around 1775. The NG being a version of a modern state militia is not my idea either.

Which document do you refer to?

Sure, I appreciate that a militia can be a bunch of pitchfork armed farmers or a bunch of AR armed tacticools, but if a militia is unaffiliated with and unsanctioned by any form of government whatsoever, then it might be tough persuading the local community that you really represent them and don't have a much smaller interest.

[x11]

It's wasn't military. The feds in Portland are US Marshalls mostly and other Fed LEO agencies like DHS, CBP, FBI, Etc. They were not and are not military personnel.

Excellent point. There is a distinction between military and federal law enforcement agencies. That does address the Posse Comitatus Act. All good, case closed?

[lpgasman]

I don't even like mailmen out on my streets.

That's sexist, there are mail women too!

[Aloha_Shooter]

The federal LEOs deployed in Seattle previously were specifically assigned to protect federal buildings. They announced that and in fact kept to that. I don't have a problem with that mission. I haven't seen what was announced for Portland recently but again don't have any issue if it was similar -- just to protect federal buildings and structures (including statues and memorials).

The governor can of course activate the National Guard in his/her state for other assigned missions, whether it's helping out with emergency management, search and rescue, or protecting kids going to school.

Equating the "militia" in the 2A to the National Guard is a false and fairly recent (1930s) predicate. The point of the well-armed militia (common people) is that they ARE the local community. As such, being well-armed places them in the position of being able to resist that government overreach.

[CS1983]

Re: Well-Regulated

from a now removed page (found it via webarchive)

The meaning of the phrase "well-regulated" in the 2nd amendment
From: Brian T. Halonen <halonen@csd.uwm.edu>

The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

[MrPrena]

That's sexist, there are mail women too!

His/Her mailcarrier who deliver it to his/her house could be a male.