A Well Regulated Militia

I was thinking about starting a Militia with a few of my friends and realized that there are laws in the State of New York that seem to forbid such a thing. We would simply be friends who individually posses lawful firearms and have no ideological bend aside from collectively protecting ourselves and one another within the confines of State and Federal Law.

Does anyone have any tips for how we should start this group? Could we instead be called a Hunting Club or Scouts instead of Militia or Paramilitary Group? Should we practice with paintball guns collectively and firearms when we are separated?

What is the legal way to enjoy the obvious right to form a well regulated Militia in the State of New York or other States that have bizarre laws against Militias?

Some of my friends are police officers and I wouldn't want them to get in trouble with the State.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by US Constitution

The Congress shall have power . . .

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

---

~:confused:

Showing that you're well regulated would be a start. Though, any government cause trouble when it comes to who would do the regulating.

Call yourselves the "Scruff McGruff National Liberation Army" and buy an assload of fully automatic AK-47s, some Panzerfausts, and body armor for everyone and build a bunker.

That should do the trick. :2thumbsup:

Seriously... keeping in touch with a government official (preferably a sheriff; they would probably be more lax than your average police officer) would be the best idea to make sure you don't seem threatening or step on any toes. Scouts is a better name than "militia" as well.

And yeah, practice with paintball.

Be careful how far you go in getting government approval, if you get too official you may find yourself called up on a trip to a hot and sandy locale. ~D

Hahaha. I think the paintball idea with arms training on the side will be the best way to do it.

I don't even need to call it a militia - more like a defense pact.

Quote:

---

more like a defense pact.

---

It's like Gangs of New York..but I don't know if your Liam Niesson, Daniel-Day Lewis, or Leonardo DeCaprio?

It's not illegal to form yourself into a paramilitary group. It's illegal to form yourself into a paramilitary group that has the stated aim the overthrow of the Constitutional government. What do you think settlers on the Frontier did in the 1800's?

All that being said, what exactly is the purpose of your group? If it's simply to train yourselves in small group tactics for your own mutual self defense, you shouldn't face any problems. If you want add to that a political component whereby you seek to work within the system to change it to be more in line with what you'd like to see, well, then you'd be the NRA. ~D

Is it just me, or does the whole militia movement strike anybody else as a 1980s flashback? Am I just showing my age?

Does anybody remember the Michigan Militia?

-edit-

P.S.: TuffStuffMcGruff, to the best of my knowledge, most people consider the National Guard to be the cognate of a "well regulated militia."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Is it just me, or does the whole militia movement strike anybody else as a 1980s flashback? Am I just showing my age?

Does anybody remember the Michigan Militia?

-edit-

P.S.: TuffStuffMcGruff, to the best of my knowledge, most people consider the National Guard to be the cognate of a "well regulated militia."

---

I understand, but if I can own a gun, my friend paul can own a gun, my friend Shawn can own a gun, etc - why can't we all get together and decide on common defense plans for our families and go to the shooting range together? New York has specific laws against this.

Nevermind - I'ts going to be like a hunting, paintball, shooting range club of about 15 people. That shouldn't be a problem in NY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I understand, but if I can own a gun, my friend paul can own a gun, my friend Shawn can own a gun, etc - why can't we all get together and decide on common defense plans for our families and go to the shooting range together? New York has specific laws against this.

---

Because having a thousand different paramilitary groups running around the country without reporting to anyone but themselves isn't seen as a very good idea...

It's a democracy thingy, you want armed force to be under democratic control, to avoid coups. It's what the nazi's were doing in the 30's, remember.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Because having a thousand different paramilitary groups running around the country without reporting to anyone but themselves isn't seen as a very good idea...

It's a democracy thingy, you want armed force to be under democratic control, to avoid coups. It's what the nazi's were doing in the 30's, remember.

---

And those other paramilitary Nazis, The Sons of Liberty..

What are you defending against? Last time I checked, bandits were not in the area, Sire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Because having a thousand different paramilitary groups running around the country without reporting to anyone but themselves isn't seen as a very good idea...

It's a democracy thingy, you want armed force to be under democratic control, to avoid coups. It's what the nazi's were doing in the 30's, remember.

---

Giving power to the people is the very meaning of democracy.

Tuff, I don't see any problem with a bunch of friends who enjoy firearms getting together and playing paintball, and planning how to react in the case of a natural disaster. Simple common sense preparation.

CR

Then again, you could always do what the Bolsheveks and the IRA and Hamas do.

Form a political wing and a military wing. It's okay if you're all in both groups, just don't mention politics with a gun in your hands and you're golden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

It's a democracy thingy, you want armed force to be under democratic control, to avoid coups. It's what the nazi's were doing in the 30's, remember.

---

The Nazis did come into power in a technically legal manner, however unsavoury they were.

I think we'll call ourselves the Man Scouts

Poor choice IMO. If I were to create a paramilitary group, I'd give it a stupidly-epic name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

The Nazis did come into power in a technically legal manner, however unsavoury they were.

---

Yes, but their brownshirts is the reason for a lot of laws against forming militias.

Anyway, the nazi's is one example, there are plenty of examples of militias gone bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CR

Giving power to the people is the very meaning of democracy.

---

The formation of groups like Hamas, IRA or SA is "the very meaning of democracy"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Anyway, the nazi's is one example, there are plenty of examples of militias gone bad.

---

Oh get off itt. There are plenty of examples of militias gone good. Heck there are Communist militias, that should appeal to you.

Besides he's gonna call his hunting group the 'Man Scouts". How lame can you get?



:creep:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Oh get off itt. There are plenty of examples of militias gone good. Heck there are Communist militias, that should appeal to you.

---

Nah, I count those among "militias gone bad"....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Nah, I count those among "militias gone bad"....

---

'Communists gone bad' is a tautology. :smug:

Talk about a storm in a teacup! Do what you want as a group. I don't imagine that the State has time to worry about some paintballers with all the shootings that go on.

~:smoking:

NSF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I think we'll call ourselves the Man Scouts

---

Will you be recruiting in Greenwich Village? :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

The formation of groups like Hamas, IRA or SA is "the very meaning of democracy"?

---

Did I say that?

No. So let's cut the strawmen, shall we?

I meant that the people, all of them, should have power and force to overthrow a government that becomes tyrannical.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

Will you be recruiting in Greenwich Village? :laugh4:

---

Is it that we are scouting for men, or that we are men who are scouts? I don't know.

It's no worse than "Boy Scouts"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

It's no worse than "Boy Scouts"

---

Yes it is. The whole thing sounds terribly gay already, don't make it worse for yourself. :laugh4:

https://img152.imageshack.us/img152/...intballrd0.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Is it that we are scouting for men, or that we are men who are scouts? I don't know.

It's no worse than "Boy Scouts"

---

Why not just call yourselves scouts? Boy scouts are called boy scouts, because, I think, normal 'scouts' would not be boys but men.

Or the "[Location] Scouts"?

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Why not just call yourselves scouts? Boy scouts are called boy scouts, because, I think, normal 'scouts' would not be boys but men.

Or the "[Location] Scouts"?

CR

---

The Chelsea Square Scouts?

I mean, 'square' doesn't sound gay does it?

ROFL.

Make it sound as dramatic as possible.

What about the "New York Peoples' Constitutional Defence Army"?

Or something evil, like the "TuffStuff Death Brigade"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Did I say that?

No. So let's cut the strawmen, shall we?

I meant that the people, all of them, should have power and force to overthrow a government that becomes tyrannical.

---

Allowing that will also allow militas like Hamas or SA.

You say you want the power to overthrow a tyrannical government, and you give those wanting a tyrannical government a wonderful opportunity to create it...

I believe Rabbit was simply referring to the unspoken contract between a government and the people.

(Who was that, Hobbes?)

Anyway, when the Government does not uphold its side of the contract, i.e. it becomes tyrannical and the people no longer wish to be in the contract, they should have the right to end the contract with the government and create a new one (contract and government) which they agree with.

Modern governments -- and people -- would do well to take this to heart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reverend Joe

Anyway, when the Government does not uphold its side of the contract, i.e. it becomes tyrannical and the people no longer wish to be in the contract, they should have the right to end the contract with the government and create a new one (contract and government) which they agree with.

---

All good in theory. In practice, however, it leaves the path open for those desiring a less desirable government, be that fascism, theocracy, communism or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

All good in theory. In practice, however, it leaves the path open for those desiring a less desirable government, be that fascism, theocracy, communism or whatever.

---

With the amount of libertarians and conservatives in America, I don't think the rise of fascism or communism is a real issue. Here in Europe we might see that problem a little bit more, but I don't think so for America. Not yet at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Not yet at least.

---

That's the problem, isn't it? Who knows what the future will bring? Fascism needs a few people in strategic places with power and money, theocracy needs some religious whippin', communism needs demagogues inciting the poor/working class. None of those are unrealistic in any country IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

That's the problem, isn't it? Who knows what the future will bring? Fascism needs a few people in strategic places with power and money, theocracy needs some religious whippin', communism needs demagogues inciting the poor/working class. None of those are unrealistic in any country IMO.

---

The excellent thing about having a regulated militia is that for every communist militia, you have a libertarian militia. As well as that, you have the regular army - if one militia tries to seize power, the regulars and opposing militias will step in.

I always figured that a 'well-regulated militia' would be made up of anarchists....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

The excellent thing about having a regulated militia is that for every communist militia, you have a libertarian militia. As well as that, you have the regular army - if one militia tries to seize power, the regulars and opposing militias will step in.

---

The bad thing is that there is no real way of knowing who will end up as the biggest one, nor is it really possible to know who the army will support. The army is always present in coups, and rarely on the "good side".

Also, the "militias"(private army is a better term IMO) are growing.... Blackwater have become a 20.000 man army in 10 years. Imagine 10 such armies 10 times the size, each with a different leader... That sounds like a glorious civil war if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Also, the "militias"(private army is a better term IMO) are growing.... Blackwater have become a 20.000 man army in 10 years. Imagine 10 such armies 10 times the size, each with a different leader... That sounds like a glorious civil war if you ask me.

---

Blackwater isn't a militia, it's a professional mercenary army. You can tell the difference by the size of the paychecks. :yes: Being in a proper militia should not be your day job...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

Blackwater isn't a militia, it's a professional mercenary army. You can tell the difference by the size of the paychecks. :yes: Being in a proper militia should not be your day job...

---

No, but for this purpose they serve basically the same role, don't they?

They're a private army outside democratic control, like a militia would be. And a damn big one too...

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment behind the idea of militias that guarantee the citizens' freedoms, it is a rather touching fantasy.

One of the best examples for why is the United States herself. Some time past, a group of peoples/their representative states decided they didn't like the way the social contact was going and decided to opt out. Another group of peoples/representative states decided they rather fancied the idea of imposing their version of the contract on the recalcitrant. Inevitably, they had a Civil War about the issue and guess what? Those who had overwhelming control of government assets stomped all over the romantics, despite the latter being better led.

Plus ça change. Insurgencies may irritate governments but whilst those governments control the armies and the means of production, it's tough to overthrow them. Most especially if that government has become tyrannical (inevitably less squeamish) and far more so these days with their hold over modern weaponry. When the Constitution was written, it was still just possible to eject an unwelcome tyranny by militia - as long as it had a four thousand mile supply chain and a mad king. Nowadays I suspect one will find those helpful conditions somewhat scarce.

It took us eight hundred years to change the occupation of a foreign government that the majority of the Irish people hated. And it took terrorists to do it (and the development of a kinder, gentler, more civilised Britain) rather than well-regulated militas.

Yes, if you tried it in Ireland all the militias would start fighting each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment behind the idea of militias that guarantee the citizens' freedoms, it is a rather touching fantasy.

One of the best examples for why is the United States herself. Some time past, a group of peoples/their representative states decided they didn't like the way the social contact was going and decided to opt out. Another group of peoples/representative states decided they rather fancied the idea of imposing their version of the contract on the recalcitrant. Inevitably, they had a Civil War about the issue and guess what? Those who had overwhelming control of government assets stomped all over the romantics, despite the latter being better led.

Plus ça change. Insurgencies may irritate governments but whilst those governments control the armies and the means of production, it's tough to overthrow them. Most especially if that government has become tyrannical (inevitably less squeamish) and far more so these days with their hold over modern weaponry. When the Constitution was written, it was still just possible to eject an unwelcome tyranny by militia - as long as it had a four thousand mile supply chain and a mad king. Nowadays I suspect one will find those helpful conditions somewhat scarce.

It took us eight hundred years to change the occupation of a foreign government that the majority of the Irish people hated. And it took terrorists to do it (and the development of a kinder, gentler, more civilised Britain) rather than well-regulated militas.

---

The North had more than twice the number of fighting men than the south and still managed to lose religiously up until Gettysburg! If Britain had entered the war (which it had contemplated until it realized that slavery was incompatible and that they would still have the cotton markets even after the north won) You might be singing a very different tune - similar to the story of the American revolution where foreign powers swung the deciding blow against Great Britain.

What were the IRA terrorists? They were illegal Militias!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

What were the IRA terrorists? They were illegal Militias!

---

:laugh4:

Can't you see that your reasoning is utterly self-defeating?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

What were the IRA terrorists? They were illegal Militias!

---

Are terrorists good guys now, or what? I'm confused....:dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Are terrorists good guys now, or what? I'm confused....:dizzy2:

---

That depends which side you're on, doesn't it?

Quote:

---

What were the IRA terrorists? They were illegal Militias!

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
They started out as a militia that then became illegal , just like the UVF started out as a militia that then became illegal .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
They started out as a militia that then became illegal , just like the UVF started out as a militia that then became illegal .

---

I agree.
What are the smiley's for?

Banquo credited them along with a dithering British government for the creation of a sovereign Ireland. If that is an insult, I'll take it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

:laugh4:

Can't you see that your reasoning is utterly self-defeating?

---

Why? Should I use the BS reasoning that I want to defend the US from foreigners? Militias could do that, but they are primarily for the defense against people within the borders. Government, other militias, oppressive elements that can go south rather quickly. Terrorist is a relative term for one that uses terror. What constitutes terror? Some are terrified of militias, does that make them automatic terrorists?

A glorified neighboorhood watch, then?

I don't think it's a necessarily bad idea...I just don't see any point in it.

Quote:

---

What are the smiley's for?

---

They are for your lack of understanding .
But thats OK as it is a very complex history .

Just call yourselves "Town Watch", and get those red capes the Town Watch of RTW had. That way even if you never went into action at least you would look the part.

Militia's become terrorists when they swap their guns for bombs, or turns their guns against civilians. Just about any group in Ireland (on either side) I can think of has qualified as a terrorist organisation at some point by those standards. And whichever side you believe to be just (which would be the British for me from 1921, although it was also just in the origins hundreds of years earlier, not so much in the space inbetween), it is irrelevant as in the end these groups became little more than bands terrorising their own people as much as anyone else.

Quote:

---

it is irrelevant as in the end these groups became little more than bands terrorising their own people as much as anyone else

---

what you mean like concerned citizens against drugs or residents action commitee on joyriding ?

BTW Tuff , how is work on the Batcave coming along ? Are you still wanting to die exacting revenge ?

http://www.dmna.state.ny.us/nyg/nyg.html
Your state beat you to it.

http://www.dmna.state.ny.us/nyg/nygaform.html
Just print off one of these for each of your friends and you're golden.

Ajax

Have you considered joining a currently existing organization as a new chapter?

Does the group you plan to form have any plans for zombie defense? That could affect the name :beam:

@ Lemur – it seems like there for a few years Michigan couldn’t buy a piece of good publicity, Michigan Militia aarg. ~:mecry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

That depends which side you're on, doesn't it?

---

Isn't the other side the terrorists?

Quote:

---

Have you considered joining a currently existing organization as a new chapter?

---

PehapsTuff could start a local branch of.....
http://sonoguy.tripod.com/
A much nicer crowd than this sort....http://www.adl.org/mwd/gallery/patpray.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Isn't the other side the terrorists?

---

Or are you the terrorists to the other side?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Or are you the terrorists to the other side?

---

Nah, I'm pretty sure the terrorists are who Our Great Leader, Mr. Bush, tells us it is....

TuffStuff, make sure you understand NYS Penal Law Article 35, as it applies to the justification and degree of physical force used for self defense. Your law enforcement friends should be thoroughly familiar with this since they deal with it on a daily basis and should be able to explain how it applies to you and what your rights and responsibilities are.

No State, County, or Town will officially sanction a "citizens militia" group for obvious legal reasons. Law enforcement personnel undergo rigorous & costly training throughout their careers, from Penal law to firearms to interpersonal relationship skills and on and on. The costs and legal ramifications would be enormous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

TuffStuff, make sure you understand NYS Penal Law Article 35, as it applies to the justification and degree of physical force used for self defense. Your law enforcement friends should be thoroughly familiar with this since they deal with it on a daily basis and should be able to explain how it applies to you and what your rights and responsibilities are.

No State, County, or Town will officially sanction a "citizens militia" group for obvious legal reasons. Law enforcement personnel undergo rigorous & costly training throughout their careers, from Penal law to firearms to interpersonal relationship skills and on and on. The costs and legal ramifications would be enormous.

---

Chavez can do it. :inquisitive:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4635187.stm

Join your State Defense Force. It is the regulated and approved militia of your state, governed by State Law with no Federal attachments.

You sign up for a one year non-obligatory non-binding term of service, which means that you may quit with no consequences.

Of course, I know you aren't serious about joining a "real" militia, but I thought I would post this useless information anyway.

Oh, and by the way, your State Defense Force / Militia is NOT DEPLOYABLE OVERSEAS. It is absolutely, positively, 100% unable to be federally activated. They serve only at the pleasure of the governor in State Emergencies. Out-of-State assignments within the U.S. are volunteer only, such as the CSMR's minor contribution to Hurricane Katrina.

This differs greatly from the National Guard.

Quote:

---

This differs greatly from the National Guard.

---

Yeah , but would it mean that I can't shoot criminals or lay my life down in the cause of vengance because that is what is needed till I build my batcave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yeah , but would it mean that I can't shoot criminals or lay my life down in the cause of vengance because that is what is needed till I build my batcave

---

Manifest Destiny isn't for everyone...but the right to effective self defense is in my neighborhood.~:wacko:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reverend Joe

Seriously... keeping in touch with a government official (preferably a sheriff; they would probably be more lax than your average police officer) would be the best idea to make sure you don't seem threatening or step on any toes. Scouts is a better name than "militia" as well.

And yeah, practice with paintball.

---

Indeed. :yes::yes::yes: