Ken Bontempo

Ken Bontempo
Birthday
May 13
Bio
WRITER: Comedy, Fairytale politics AUTHOR: Fictional autobiography, children's stories POET: Heterographic poetry ESSAYIST: Diatribes & desultory invectives

MY RECENT POSTS

Ken Bontempo's Links

Salon.com
JANUARY 17, 2013 10:12AM

The Slave State Amendment.

Rate: 2 Flag

Militia is the Latin word for soldiery. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads, “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.”

Which means, in order to maintain state security (slave states, Virginia in particular) citizen soldiers, who are members of a well-regulated Militia, have the right to own guns and that right cannot be violated.

At the time of writing the U.S. Constitution, the term Militia meant: a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies.

The law was actually written to serve the slave patrols that kept African negros in check to make sure they didn’t form an uprising against the white slave owners. Most white male citizens were required to serve on these slave patrols - they were not enrolled for military service - they were vigilantes. And slave patrols were on constant watch - not just in time of emergencies. Slave states were “police states.”

After slavery was abolished public interpretation of militia seemed to evolve into: a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers. [By today’s standards, these would be considered reservists and not part of a standing army.] Some militia members became freelance mercenaries like Quantrill's Raiders during the Civil War.

Now the term militia seems to have evolved into: a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government. [Today’s self-proclaimed militias are heavily armed (and not well regulated) bands of citizens who have decided to protect themselves from their own government. Their right to bear arms seems questionable here - and needs proper definition.

Task: define “well regulated militia” in this context.

Does it mean that when public security is threatened citizens who are members of militias will defend their right to security with the use of arms (i.e. weapons) (e.g. muskets, pitchforks, clubs)? Does well-regulated mean that those citizen soldiers are acting under the authority of some common leadership? And not acting wildly and uncontrollably on their own?

It seems that only militias have the right to bear arms - and not private citizens who do not belong to a “well regulated militia.” And by today’s definition of militia, it seems illogical to let bands of armed anti-government forces retain the right to “keep and bear arms” in case they are attacked by their own government.

This country has to decide if its citizens have the right to keep a gun in their homes or cars for personal defense, own and use rifles and shotguns for hunting, and be allowed to obtain high-capacity, semi-automatic weapons of mass destruction.

While in the U.S. Army, I personally operated belt-fed 30-caliber and 50-caliber machine guns. Those were very effective weapons for killing large amounts of enemy soldiers in a short period of time. I would love to own one in case my front yard is overrun with zombies or vampires, but unfortunately my local, state and federal governments won’t let me keep one, in spite of my right to maintain the security of the private state of my front yard.

Perhaps what many fear is the slavery is not dead and that militias still exist. Only now it is disguised as our prison system whose militia guards safeguard the “security of the State” by controlling tens of thousands of blacks incarcerated in “penal plantations.”

At any rate, why does anyone not in military service need a semi-automatic assault weapon? And don’t say it’s because you have the right to own one. What would you use it for? Just answer that and the debate may be solved.

 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
hamilton, with madison the chief writer of the constitution, discussed the need for a militia at some length, as a defense against a government become oppressive, in 'the federalist papers.'

the usa government is drifting into oppression, and someday the people might be glad to have assault weapons if they must resist their government. but a more important component of resistance is psychological: the character to stand up against overwhelming force, and they community spirit needed to turn individual resistance into legitimate struggle. these elements are notably missing, which is why the government is becoming oppressive: because they can, and it is easy.
Piers Morgan last night tried to get a couple of gun 'enthusiasts' (to use a kind term) to say why they needed military weapons. The one at least had no interest in coming up with a response, because it was irrelevant to her - she has the *absolute* right to own whatever weapons she wanted, period.

While written constitutions are all fine (we lived here in Canada for a long while and Britain still does, I think) with common law and precedent and a willingness to change with the times, but with no written constitution. I was mildly shocked to hear Al Roker who was on with Morgan after the gun nuts make the common-sense (but blasphemous) assertion that the people who wrote the constitution, like the people who wrote the bible, were of their time. Why parse the meaning of obsolete sections of a constitution written in a very different era? Why not make rules and regulations for the present day. (Cue screams...)
Indeed. Every bit of this is about a Police State, the South---it is impossible to have slavery without a Police State, absolutely impossible for obvious reasons. But, Slavery never, ever ended and all it takes a true walk through Southern Herstory to encounter the facts, all of which are duly written and transcribed into the Gub'mint archives of Dixie.

Immediately following the Civil War, forget Reconstruction, each and every Cavalier Off-i-soor right away began the campaigns of the White League and the KKK. After killing and terrorizing every black in site they could (the statistics on Louisiana black voter registrations during Reconstruction tell this entire story with absolute clarity), they never, ever actually surrendered, and still haven't as by far the majority of the USA's current problems are caused by the Seditious Confederate Traitors currently serving Southern States in Congress.

Getting around the 14th Amendment was easy, the South, which is still incredibly backward today (I lived there during segregation, wondered which water fountain little Hawaiians were to use, and went to school there for as long as I could stand, so, DON'T tell me a word about it if you plan to lie or obfuscate) had no roads at the time, so, immediately passed "Laws" (Ha!) stating any black walking a railroad line was subject to immediate incarceration on, drumroll please, a chain gang picking cotton. If anything, life was much worse for these poor souls from the 1860s to the Civil Rights Act, and, it still continues today, as you clearly point out, through the racist drug war.

Americans are complete cowards on race for the most part, it's pathetic- weak and worthless. What we have is a CONSENSUS HERSTORY. What consensus? The one it took for the Norther and Southern leaders, all West Point grads who had previously stolen Mexico together, to re-assemble in a post Civil War society, in the same room together, and speak without "offending" the pathetic Cavalier "System of Honor".

The US South was founded, not by Europeans directly, but by a Barbadan Cavalier Racist Horror Show which entirely believed in Royalty and pledged allegiance never to this great nation but always to "Good" King Charles. Don't believe it Southerners? Brainwashed by evil REVISIONISM? Then retire to CHARLEStown in CAROlina, and ponder your cowardice some more...

Auwe (Alas)

Ken Bontempo's Favorites

  1. No relations made yet.