I believe that militias, as I have defined them, are necessary for
our country. I believe this for three reasons:
1. They act as security, as well as the
preservation of the rule of law in a vacuum
a. Prime example of the need for a local arm
of law is natural disasters. After hurricane Katrina there was a power
vacuum, where people looted, assaulted others and committed other crimes.
This would be preventable if we had a trained civilian infrastructure (to
assist a police force which is not meant to handle something on that large a
scale) to maintain the rule of law.
2. This program would provide military style
training to those who would otherwise not have access or who would not
want to enter the huge commitment which is the military, increasing in our
general population discipline and competency in a wide range of tasks and
skills, as well as physical fitness. Included in this is firearms
training and discipline, helping to lower gun violence through education and
training
a. We could possibly reduce gun violence and
crime because we have more readily trained individuals, as well as people being
more disciplined and educated about weapons.
3. Disseminates power back to the
people. Provides a more widespread accumulation of skills and training
that previously were unavailable to anyone who didn't enlist.
This not only would improve individuals, but would help the country as a whole
improve, as well as returning us to the founding ideal of civilian
self-sufficiency.
a. Not accountable to the federal or state
government but rather to the people that they serve
b. Additionally, this enables more civilian
control of military grade weapons such as assault rifles, machine guns and
rocket launchers, without allowing them to be used for murder or other
malevolent action
These militias would be led by local leadership, such as mayors
and city councils. Their officers would be military or law enforcement
veterans, or ordinary people. But they would need to go to an academy to
teach them and evaluate them on their abilities and skills to be able to serve
their militia. They would be privately funded, or by grants from the
federal government, and would use mostly private supplies, their status however
allowing them to purchase military hardware.
Some will say that this is the same as the National Guard.
There are two fundamental, defining characteristics that differentiate these
militias from the National Guard: that they are run locally, not by the federal
or state government so they can react immediately to disaster or invasion and
that they are not deployed to combat away from their areas of
jurisdiction. They are kind of like half police deputies half National
Guard.
The main counter-argument to this can be explained as this: do we
want more gun nuts running around toting machine guns? Will that help
with the problem or just result in more death or one power hungry moron
asserting martial law? We respect the police and the Army. Once
established, this program will have the same principles to it that allow us to
trust the police and the military: Training, professionalism, honor and duty.
These are the founding principles that make our country great!
I thought that this interesting was a very well thought out argument. I really liked how you focused on the militias and how important they really are. From reading this blog post I see that they are needed. If we look at history of older times in the United States we see them being used a lot and for a lot of good. I see this being a great strength. One maybe problem that would and could exist would be the people that are in your militia, are they all trusted? How about are they all mentally competent? That'
ReplyDeleteI would suggest and implement the same controls an similar to identical training in this group as with the military and police. They would be led by retired or otherwise available police or military officers to provide that level of training. It is important, I agree, to prevent these weapons from being used maliciously. Psychological tests and checks would be administered frequently.
DeleteThis was an interesting argument I don't think I've ever thought about before. I think that a greater military capacity at the local level is a great way at mobilizing people in a natural disaster. Like you said, this would definitely help to keep peace in a time of chaos without federal government intervention. However, how will these groups be paid for? Will every person need to buy his/her own weapon as part of this? Also, I assume that the background checks for these people would be extensive to prevent dangerous applicants from getting ahold of weapons.
ReplyDeleteThis would be an evolving program that would need to learn and grow through experience. The funding could come from both dues, and from private supplies. And, as for the weapons, the membership would, for this case, be a license to buy and place these weapons at military pricing into the use of the militia. And yes, while the militias would keep their own records, extensive checks would be necessary.
DeleteLike Richard said, though, this is a very well thought-out argument. I really like your point where you addressed the issue about gun-nuts running around this country. I was a little concerned about the idea of readilly-available access to military grade firearms, but your point about the police and military really helped me see your point more clearly and helped reassure me. There will still need to be strong oversight, though. Also, where will the military-grade weapons be stored; in private homes or in an arsenal? If they are in private homes, that could pose a series of new problems, as even the police don't have access to rocket launchers.
ReplyDeleteStrong oversight would be present, and the weapons would be stored in a private, incredibly secure arsenal. Only certain higher ranks would have ready access to these weapons and they would only be administered for training and action.
Delete