Last I checked, the Constitution was the supreme law of the land.

Last I checked, all males between 18 and 45 belong to the militia.

Last I checked, law enforcement was not a Constitutionally delegated job of the Federal Government.

Last I checked, police states were not something to be proud of, and American Citizens were sovereign.

So why is it that instead of calling out the militia to voluntarily guard so-called "vulnerable" targets, the Federal government is going to take the lead? According to this article [url]http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-101501safe.story[/url] the cost for the next 5 years could be around $1.5 trillion.

If we can find volunteers to go teach inner-city youths to play chess (true) why couldn't we find a couple hours each a week to go hang out by the local power station or water treatment facility with our own guns?

How much would that cost the government? A heck or a lot less than $1.5 trillion, I guarantee you. It would have to be a lot less dangerous to our freedoms than a domestically deployed standing army, which will destroy them.

I would volunteer, and I could be available for 4 hours a week without infringing on my self-indulgent consumer lifestyle.

While I agree with your sentiments, the problem is that the America of today is not the same place it was in 1776.  Frankly, you can't just let anyone who shows up with a gun guard a nuclear power plant.  There is a good chance that the person who shows up will try to blow up the plant.  And you already know what will happen as soon as the first person gets turned away from duty (lawsuit time/discrimination).  

Can you imagine being forced to allow a bunch of afghani immigrants who obtained citizenship guard a power plant?????


-SS

I agree. This is not 1776 and there are no Redcoats to fight. There is no reason for civilians to own militia weapons as it is an outdated, uneeded and dangerous concept.

On October 24th, please help celebrate the anniversary of the only organization that has legitimacy in modern world today.

Jes a couple ommissions from yer statements which I'll insert w/ [i]italics[/i] will get them in line with reality...  sadly...



Sad... but true...  :(

OCTJMO... ICBW...

db

True enough on the sentiment. But where do gas masks, chemical resistant suits, decon equipment, testing aparatus, detection equipment, training, and research come from??

They have to be paid for somehow.

I think much of the gear they want to by is to  stop the attacks, or limit the damage. You know stuff firefighters, EMTS's, hospitals may need.  

FWIW The pre-amble of the Constitution

[b]We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.[/b]

[red]insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity[/red]
all of that would be threatened by a nerve gas attack.

Perhaps that is what they are thinking about.

And I guess some of you don't understand why some think gun owners are nuts.  Some think they are still in 1776, the world is different today than back than.  That doesn't mean the government should take fire arms, but to make absurd statements comparing the two times make you appear either to not understand the nature of warfare today or stretching (rationalizing) your need for fire arms.  

STLRN,

What I was posing as an idea is not that much different from the concept of "Neighborhood Watch" or the Guardian Angels.

By your rationale unarmed citizens patrolling their neighborhods with cell phones and flashlights do "not understand the nature of warfare (crime) today", and they are obviously nuts.

Certainly having unarmed citizens going up against criminals on drugs and armed with cheap guns would seem absolute folly.

The concept I have is that "the militia", (more commonly known as "the citizens") would take responsibility for protecting their own homes and communities. I am not suggesting that we all, of our own volition, start showing up at strategic spots armed to the teeth. Instead, with training from and under the orders of local law enforcement we would volunteer to help. It would be a lot cheaper, and it would bring back the concept of self-defense as a communal duty.

It is no different than the CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) program that assists professional rescuers during natural disasters.

Read my post:

UNITED STATES NATIONAL DEFENSE FORCE

There are some who believe that because someone designates a person as a guard or a LEO or whatever that the designated person is actually qualified to do the job.
Having worked with LEO's and seen what is happening in NYC now I can tell you that is not the case.
I am sure that there are many on this board who would be eminently more qualified with a minimum of training.
This is 2001 and should be obvious that the traing of law enforcement, with the exception of a few specialized groups, is woefully lacking.

I got that you guys are concenred about several things here, power limits on the central government, States rights, the rights of the indvidual, and so on.

I think though your not on target here. The "homeland defense" seems to be talking about several things

Making it more difficult for terrorist to enter the country by looking at the procedures used in granting visas and work permits.

Strenghtening infrastructure so that roads, bridges, water supplies, electrical supplies, and so on are less vulnerable and easier to repair or bypass damaged areas.

Looking at making buildings more secure. Looking at making governement computers more secure, against hacker and attackers. Looking at improving the security of major facilities NYSE, Boening aircraft, etc. that if the were damaged would be disruptive.

Costs are associated with studying the problem, researching solutions and paying for any structural changes. I don't think they are talking about putting people out on "terrorist check points".

A news stroy I saw was talking about how vulnerable air handling facilities are for big buildings. It's difficult to spread stuff like anthrax, unless you are standing outside an 80 story building that has a massive air intake 7' off the ground.....

Imagine the cost of studying every federal and  state office building to decide if parking areas should be redesigned, entrances and exits fire alarm and air handling systems updated, or inclusion of new systems, PA's or evacution annunciators.  

Then there is the cost associated for dealing with a terrorist attack. Special anti-NBC gear for every fire dept. Updating labs to safely test NBC materials. Training for the people to use the gear.

Training for medical people. Do you know that in many hospitals the HVAC circulates the air throughout the hospital. So if on patient with noxious chemicals, biological spores enter the emergency room he has probably contaminated every Dr, RN, and med-tech in the ER, not to mention the other patients. If the contaminated patient stays in the ER the HVAC system spread the contaminant throughout the hospital. Maybe "homeland defense" will design and pay for a special HVAC system for ER's to limit that contamination.

I understand your concerns about civil liberties and individual rights. But much of what they talk about in the linked article is stuff to make targets tougher by engineering.

Watch them rascals but don't jump to conclusions.

You're joking?
If you're not joking, and truly believe this, than that's a testament as to WHY the "militia" is not up to the task.
Preventing terrorism is not about standing around with an AR and camo-bandana tied around your head.  It involves massive intelligence and communication assets.  It requires that these assets be secure.  THAT requires background checks and uniform training, unity of command and equipment.

That you do not understand this, is the answer to you question: "So why is it that instead of calling out the militia to voluntarily guard so-called "vulnerable" targets, the Federal government is going to take the lead? "

The Media always presents two false choices in their stories.  It is the way of the manipulator, and basically comes from their schooling where they were are tought(brainwashed) that you must trade liberty for security. BULLSHIT!!! They cannot think very well, and they just go from what they are tought.  Philosophers and logisticians they are not.

Ben

Life isn't perfect.  

ANYTHING that the police do, or have ever done, to prevent crime, infringes on our freedoms.

IF we fail to prevent a nuclear detonation on our soil, or a massive (1,000,000+ deaths) plague, these arguments about freedom will become moot.
If either event occurs, we will see an economic depression that makes "The Depression" seem like a joke.  We will see famine (so will Europe).  We will also see martial law.
The end of America and "freedom".

So keep this in mind.  

Okay, if you were guarding a nuclear power plant w/ your militia buddies, how would you do it?  Do you think terrorists run around in full traditional Arab dress, waving a scimitar and sceaming "Death to the great satan!"?  You're looking for a chance to play minuteman here, not make any serious contribution.

STLRN,  Just because the world changes technologically doesn't mean that human nature changes at all.  The concepts of our time may change, but really and truly they havn't. Goodness is still goodness, is still goodness. Our tools may change (get better) but we ourselves do not. It could be argued that the world has lost something since then. Read their spoken word and you will see what I mean.  They could think & speak with great clarity and meaning.  That is something that is lost in most cases today.  Just because some things have changed doesn't mean they should have. And truly things are what they are. I attribute some peoples epistomology to use your terms"thinking they are in the 1700's" to mean that they have made a judgement and decision that the caliber of person of that time was superior to that of today. They have acted accordingly.  Just because the world may change does not mean you have to forget how we got here in the first place, and more importantly the foundation which "TODAY" is built on.  I am glad in this case there are people who think that way.  If a savage refuses to change that is his fault. For those who are running headlong toward savagery(some people in this nation) then those are dangerous to our constitution. As I take it to be pinnacle of Civilization up to this point.

Ben

It is so nice to see the sheeple baaaing in this thread...we need the government!!!! For what?
I know twenty people well enough to say "They aint terrorists" Multiply that by the number of gun owners in America and we got the people side
of these actions covered. THE GOVERNMENT made good and sure that no one on the planes could stop the so-called terrorists. The GOVERNMNT gave somebody a perfect delivery system for anonymous mailings...."well Joe I have had this route for twenty years and I do not understand why that nice Syrian gentlman is sending mail to TOM BROKJAW" This is obviously not 1776, because nobody wants to do anything except set in their little boxes and cry "GW help me!" Take one day this weekend and go talk to your neigbors, learn what is going on in their lives and get involved. From whatever quarter YOU personally are under attack and you want to give the GOVT more responsibility over your life? Everyone keeps talking about the costs....there is only one cost that is going to make a difference-life-can you give some of yours or are you going to move to France.

Talking to your neighbors just isn't quite the "intelligence network" that is required to defend against a concerted, foreign state-funded, attempt to detroy our nation. Sorry.
The sentiment is charming, but this is big-league, high stakes, 21st Century stuff, here.  
We can talk about "the way things SHOULD be", or we can talk about the way things are.
Neighborhood watch is not going to stop this.

Oh hell nomex on....is that the only argument you can find with the whole idea of personal responsibility? And for a foreign funded blah blah blah, it was prettty damned weak and it continues to be pretty weak. Ain't nobody shooting missiles on this one...every "attack"
seems to have started on a plot of land inside the US with a gunowner or a member of the militia within reach. Play woulda, coulda on this with me...could you have stopped a hijacker with a box-cutter, could you have,as a mail carrier of say two years noticed something funny about a Syrian mailing letters to senators and news anchors. Neighborhood watch is how we got this country and you are saying we can't keep it
"by the people and for the people"

Okay, hound.  You and your twenty trustworth friends go out and put a stop to the anthrax mailings.  Today.  Then, you'll have proven the truth of what you say.  Right now, I'm inclined to agree with Major-Murphy.

Hound,
You're talking hindsight, and reaction.  We need to prevent.
The type of prevention you're talking about is effective against muggers and car-jackers AND stupid terrorists.  It is not, however, going to prevent what we are up against NOW.  NOW is when we have to deal with this.  
How does a postal carrier know that the person who dropped a letter into a mail box is Syrian, anyway?

Still wearing the nomex and not getting hot yet.
Ok Paul Revere,you go stop the British while we
watch hockey OK.......Ok Daniel Boone, you go to Texas, we have a gun show this weekend...Hey Stonewall, we will show up when you get to Philadelphia.....same thing different date.

I'll answer that one myself. With survailence cameras.  You just scrutinize all "swarthy types" (or suspected Syrians) who mail anything suspicious, like a letter.  Whoops, there goes that freedom you profess to care about.

Are you alright?

Humm, I'm kind of split on the concept of Joe Average citizen armed with his trusty SKS guarding key resources such as nuclear power plants, water treatment plants and the like.

Sure, I agree the citizen militia is an important element for our national security and a symbol of our individual freedom.  But, is it wise to let any Tom, Dick or Harry with a gun provide security for high risk resources such as airports and power plants?  I think not.  We need trained professionals, people will anti-terrorism training and advanced CQB training.  The notion our key resources would be guarded by non-professional civilians seems too third worldish to me and should only be considered when other more potent options aren't available.  I think almost everyone would opt for the security of trained professionals over Billy Bob and his Mini-14.

If we were to use civilian resources, we should be selective as to who is used and what training they've had or we can give them.  They need to have appropriate weapons (not Dad's hunting rifle) and equipment (such as night vision).  Who is qualified to select the proper civilian resources?  Probably the military or even various private security firms.  But then it costs money to train people and to equip them... something our government has already done.  So it would be redundant to give the necessary training to civilians and might actually wind up costing more.

In small towns or in rural areas it makes sense that perhaps the local authorities take volunteers to help stand guard over schools, water facilities and other resources.  Someone with some experience needs to organize these efforts though.

And that's my 2 cents.

Sad to say…most politicians today would say WHAT CONSTITUITION…?
How many laws are passed, executive orders and Departments of whatever, issues their own directives that buy pass the CONSTITUITION…today…?
Only when these laws and directives are challenged in court and then are declared UN-CONSTITUITIONAL.  How many are never challenged?  They depend on the ignorance and fear of the citizens today to pass whatever laws they can, create Departments that become great suck holes for taxpayers money.
This Homeland Dept. of Defense will become another political appointment buddy system to reward political hacks and campaign contributors.  
A National Police force ready to be un-leashed on the US by the next bill clinton…

The funny thing is that there is no shortage of professional, state and federal manpower for this mission of security.  People seem to think that it would be prudent to take these guys, stop them from doing their jobs, and use them to train less qualified individuals for the mission and call them, "militia".
Silly.

OK prevention...no more paying other people's kids to go to school here--spurious argument #1-
we need computer people to fill in here...maybe if we paid for our kids education, we wouldn't need imports. Prevention #2 2nd amendment in full effect...every Tom,Dick, and Mary packing heat-message to everyone "We will fight for what is ours" Prevention #3 No more deals on the strategic level that would not be taken on the
personal level. Prevention #4 No more money, supplies, training to foreign nationals-If we want someone dead, can't we find an American to do the job?
And to answer your last post---no cameras--try this "Hey Joe, that boy that lives next door to you, Did he say anything strange last night when you took him out for a beer?"

All of that sounds just great, and if you were the supreme all powerful dictator, you could make it happen.  Until then, that's all fantasy and "if only...".  None of your suggestions will happen in the immediate future (if ever), or in time to prevent anything.  You obviously aren't concerned with that, though.

Think about NOW.

Perfectly stated.  It's almost comical to think anyone would seriously consider using every gun toting red-neck (which I'm proudly a member of this group!) as security for our most threatened, and subsequently valuable, resources.

We need to take this threat seriously, and having a group of untrained - unorganized civilians guarding them is silly.  There are areas where the citizen militia can assist, and I'm all for that... but this isn't one of them.

Here's a question for you militia enthusiasts.  Would you be willing to do things on a volunteer basis that didn't involve getting to carry a gun?  Would you volunteer to be part of a work-gang for four hours a week, if the work was aimed at fortifying key installations?  No gun, no cammie-jammies, nothing remotely "heroic."  I'm talking about clearing brush, digging ditches, filling sandbags, etc.  How about it?  Do you really want to make a contribution or do you just want an excuse to play at being a soldier?

Man, did you EVER nail it!  Even if they claim otherwise, many of the "militia" types are more interested in playing soldier than doing something useful.  They fancy themselves as the saviors of the freeworld and get a kick out of their K-Mart cammies and cool military *looking* rifles.

Not all of them... but a good number of them fit this profile.

Ok guys...one more time maybe and then I am giving up...working through the replies...
"professional,state and federal manpower" Do I have to list examples of screw-ups by these people or can we just take that as a given?
militia....I ain't calling nobody the militia, you are the militia. NOW---same arguments that we all use on gun-control..we can't change the now, work on the future. Comical? untrained civilians guarding installations? Did you read Blackhawk Down? Some civilians put a severe hurt on our best and brightest. Militia types playing soldier? I have already given at least two examples of behavior that would help with this and future crisises and neither or them involved firearms or combat behavior. While it must be nice to sit there and throw rocks at me, let's get real. I do not plan on following the CIC's orders of the way he wants us to handle this i.e. go shopping. I am making sure that I know my neighbors and that I avoid any unsafe situations. And hell yeah I would dig some ditches.

There's "no shortage"?  Then why are so many police departments running up overtime expenses as they respond to every sighting of a "white, powdery substance"?  Why do we have National Guardsmen with unloaded rifles in the airports instead of tapping this vast pool of security professionals?

[/b]
To error is to be human, that's something we all must live with.  You find one organization or person that hasn't screwed up in their life, and I'll give you $100.  We all make mistakes so such an argument is baseless.

I could only imagine the number of bad shootings, accidental shootings, or other screw-ups that would come from Joe Bob and his in-laws standing guard whenever they found time.  

Do you place any importance on tactics and weapons training?  I'm not talking about shooting beer can's every weekend, but practical weapons training and tactics?  Do you have any idea how rigorous military training can be for specific MOS's?  I'm a former nuclear weapons security guard (Marine) and even with the weekly training and duty we stood, I still questioned my abilities at times.  Shit, I could only imagine the screw-up's if we had issued weapons to civilians who didn't have a single day of instruction...

What you're advocating is one step above vigilantly justice.  See something suspicious... "rules of engagement?", "what's dat?"... FIRE!

No thanks.

I know who the militia is, and I know MANY people I wouldn't want standing guard or doing anything that required even a rudimentary level of professionalism, maturity or sophistication.  How do you weed the morons out if you don't have professionals managing them?

Brilliant.  You want to structure a military defense policy based upon one military [b]screw-up[/b].  I'm getting the distinct impression that you honestly believe accidents don't happen.  What I fail to understand is why you think an untrained, rag-tag bunch of ad hocly armed and trained citizens would be any less likely to screw-up.  It's mind boggling actually...

What happened in Mogadishu was a serious miscalculation, nothing more.  I can't believe you're actually citing this as an example of how a mob can defeat a professional army.

We're fighting against a militia in Afghanistan right now... even better armed and with more combat experience than the Somali's.  They haven't so much as inflicted a paint chip, much less a causality on us yet.  Care you estimate how many militia members our military has sent packing to Allah this week?  If we sent in the unregulated American militia armed with their own personal weapons and carrying their own equipment... how many dead American's do you think we would have by now?  Hundreds?  Thousands?

wgunn....let me reply with heavy sarcasm and full out humour of the SAM KINISON type....Why don't you pack your sh@t and move...the rest of us aint nuthin but poor dumb white trash and we  are not worthy to polish your jungle boots. You elitest snob, why did you join if you think everyone in America is a non-charging puke? YA look cute in a uniform?
Now to the points you brought up...screw-ups Let's talk about recent history and see if your excuses even apply(we all make mistakes) magic bullet,bay of pigs, U2, Viet Nam, Desert Storm,
,Ruby Ridge,Waco, suicide of Vince Foster, Election last year, China is now OUR FRIEND?

Joe BOB and his in-laws....Thank you sir Maybe Britain is more suited for you, They have a Queen that by birth can look down her nose. Or are you royalty?

Professionals lead...not talk down to their troops or did you just walk post and carry a gun. I have no argument with your idea that the trained should lead, but with your attitude, I would prefer the High school girls basketball team. At least they know about teamwork.

Point history...no one has ever taken Afganistan. EVER And mostly it was not defended by the USMC. The actions over there will possibly lead to a defeat of the ruling party and the installation of another bunch of heroin growers...WE WIN!!!  And to the last point again...our stated policy is to get a rich carpenters son, who is in hiding in the countryside. Why are we bombing the capital?
And yes, I think if "the good old boys" included some well-trained members of the USMC, we would have had this boy weeks ago using only civilians
weapons(which includes any small arms the Marines have) last week.
Turning the scream button off--guys I do not want to have bad feelings over this, but are we really as far off base as to believe that without Big brother, we are helpless babes?

Hound
Well from the incidents that occurred in the book Blackhawk Down" let me tell you about the hurting they put on us, we lost less than 20, they lost more than 500 hundred.  All told our casualties were around 100, their's were around 1000.  Some hurting they put on us, boy too many more lessons like that we might actually win the war.  That is what has historically happen whenever militia fought regulars, be it in past or the present.  They only win if the nation fighting them loses the political will to continue, RE what happen in Afghanistan to the Russians.  The Russians inflicted some pretty good causalities on them (most Russian losses in country were from disease not the Muj) but since the Afghanis still had the will to resist and safe havens in foreign lands they continues to fight.

Benjamin
My whole point about the “militia” is that unlike 200 years ago, it actually takes a lot of time to train someone to be in the military.  It takes almost 6 months to train just a riflemen, most Officers MOS take 6 month to a year, and things like pilots take 2 or so years to train.  So just grabbing a guy off the street would create a hazard to himself and more than like just someone the Government will have to pay SGLI on.

To those who say we are all the Militia they are full of it.  I am a regular and an officer, so I cannot be a member of a militia.  Those in the Reserves and National Guard would be in the select or ready militia, and those that aren’t in may compose your so-called militia.  

Good points STLRN...and no screaming on this one. Mogadishu (sp)? was the first example that popped into mind on this and I still have the shakes thinking about the absolute hell the guys went through and how close this mission was to absolute failure. And your points about training were excellent. But I think we could get by with a couple of weeks if the guys are immobile guards--fire control,communication,target acquisition. And a LOT of people already have at least BASIC.

good point. i would also like to add, that Nuclear power plants have their own response teams, who train also as cops. here in lynchburg va on mt. athos, they carry M16a2's and other equipment. plus a rapid response team.

I agree with Major-Murphy and OLY-M4gery. intelligence is the key, and someone who is only going to commit 4 hours a day is not going to be able to impede terrorist action. this does not mean however that the militia is useless. the organized state militia (such as the Va defense force) under the command of the Nat. guard general in respective states could well use them for disastor releif, riot control, evacuation efforts and so on. Individual citizens could pool together as a defense against rioters and looters, who like to take advantage of chaos to "breed anarchy".

Homeland defense should not superscede Citizen Militia and the Militia can not perform what Homeland defense is capable of. but they can both work in tandem to accoplish their respective tasks.

Community pooled armed citizens should be organized in their respective towns, counties and have a spokesperson or mayor to relay info to and from organized state militia and the national guard. community pooled militia should be able bodied citizens without a criminial record that would prohibit them from purchasing arms. organized state militia and national guard representiatives could help in the organization and basic training. (rules of engagement, evacuation protocol, riot control)

any thoughts?

The area that was attacked at the Pentagon was "terrorist proofed". That's why tthere wer construction workers at the Pentagon. The structure of the building was strenghtened and bullet proff glass was installed. I think that is at least part of what "homeland defense" wants to do. Upgrading the physical structure of building so terrorist attacks are less destructive.

Let's face it 1.5 trillion is a guess, and as with any govt. project there will be "pork" slipped in. All of a sudden a new national park or improvements to a current park will be slid in there for Senator "X" so that he votes for something someone else wants later. I also think 1.5 trillion over 5 years is appx equal to the defense spendin over a 5 year budget. Seems like a kind've high figure. Unless they are talking about the total amount that Federal, State, County, and local governmets will be spending, along with business and personal spending on security.

Watch them rascals but don't jump to conclusions.