• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Over 45 years of age. Am I still covered by the "militia" portion of 2A?

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

Just wanted to see what kind of interesting discussion this might arouse:



Ran into an interesting piece of information on another post. It raises a question. If you are over 45 and not covered in section 313 of title 32, are you still covered under 2A?



TITLE 10, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 13



§311. Militia: composition and classes



(a) The militia of the united states consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.



(b) The classes of the militia are-

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not member of the National Guard of the Naval Militia.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

Section 313 of Title 32 refers to persons with prior military experience who could serve as officers. These persons remain members of the militia until age 64.

By your premises, apparently not.

Most Second Amendment advocates consider the prefatory clause(s) of the 2A moot.
 

tarzan1888

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
1,435
Location
, , USA
imported post

You miss the point of the amendment.

"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."

If a similar amendment read as follows;

A well educated Electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.

I have changed only 4 words in the second statement, which is about a supposed right to education.

Would it be logical that since the "Electorate" consists of those 18 years of age and older, that those under the age of 18 are not allowed to keep and read books.

It is not logical as the education of the "Electorate" is only one part of the right to keep and read books, just as the "Militia" is only one part of the right to keep and bear Arms, and thus the right to keep and bare arms is not limited to those between 17 and 45.



Tarzan
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
imported post

moz-screenshot.jpg
Remember diagremming?

The phrase to keep and bear arms contains a compound infinitive and the common direct object of both parts. In other words, keep and bear arms apply to the militia and the people as seperate subjects.

I hope some brilliant attorney includes this in their brief on the DC case.

amend2.gif
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

color of law wrote:
PS: I'm part of the over the hill gang!!!;)

We get it. You don't have to diagram THAT for us. :)

By the way, does that diagram say keep and bear "ams" or "arns"? :)

Just as long as it doesn't say "rams." I don't want to go through that again! :) People baring their rams in public was too much. :D
 

irfner

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
434
Location
SeaTac, Washington, USA
imported post

Looks like you and I are out of the militia (unless youwere an officer) but we still get to keep and bear arms. Is that cool or what?
 

Felid`Maximus

Activist Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
1,711
Location
Reno, Nevada, USA
imported post

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is relevant even if said person isn't part of the militia.

The people being armed just makes it easier for a well regulated (Read well supplied and in good working order)militia (of the whole body of the people[of ages you specified])to exist, and such a militia happens to be beneficial (in fact, necessary)to the security of a Free State.
 
Top