National Militia Standards: Fill & Download for Free

Ask your Congressperson.Our Constitution has two sections in Article 1 that empowers the Congress to define the standards that are expected of the Militia. The first requires there to be a means to call forth the Militia and the second provides the authority to set the standards to which that militia should be expected to meet.Clause 15. The Congress shall have Power * * * To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.Clause 16. The Congress shall have Power * * * 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.In the US Code Title 10 section 246, it explicitly defines what “Militia” means:(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are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.And in case anyone tries to tell you that this is “old” or “outdated”, the last update to this area of law was in Dec 2016.In other words, nearly everyone between 17 and 45 (unless you are sexist and refuse to include women) should be required to attend a State defined training facility and required to meet a national standard. Citizens should be educated in proper use of arms, how to work as a unit, and be ready to be called to duty in the defense of the country.But, it is by the inaction of the Congress regarding this specific power that nothing is done in this regard. Sadly, I strongly believe that if people were required to meet a basic militia standard, much of the whole issue of gun control would be moot as all the lies and bogus terms would be obvious to everyone.As for how this lack of training has come to be, one again just needs to look at the political agenda of those who are empowered with this task. It should also be a clear indicator that those who run our country are NOT keeping the interests of the country in mind.

Hi Tiffany - Let's think this through - does the bill of rights ONLY protect those things that were in existence when it was written, exactly as they were in that day and time? Or does it protect the class of items referenced through to todays time. First, it is worth establishing what was in existence during the time in question. For firearms this amounted to black powder muzzle loading rifles predominantly but also extended to cannons and mortars as those were owned by some citizens (think about it - the British didn't give them to the colonists so they could fight them and there was no US government at the time to have purchased these items so where did the colonials get them??). So, by your thinking those would be the only weapons protected. At that time, the religions that we were guaranteed would have been those in existence at the time - but Mormonism, Bahai, Southern Baptist, Christian Scientists, Scientology, Hari-Krishna,and quite a few others had not been established at that time, and by your thinking would not be protected by the freedom of religion clause. The "press", at that time, was manually operated printing presses that used hand set type and were cumbersome and slow to operate and hand written notes, not the printing presses of today, the printers most of us have at home, or anything more modern. Today that would include internet based publications and our radio and televised news and entertainment - all that would not be covered by your thinking. As for your right against search and seizure, the bill of rights only guarantees it for "persons, houses, papers and effects - no mention of your computer, your phone, your car, or anything you store in the cloud. Also, insisting that things be as they were when the constitution and Bill of Rights were passed does not allow for many current legal extensions to these rights now enjoyed by US citizenry such as privacy, access to abortion, and gay marriage. We may not all agree on these things but they can be construed from the "non-enumerated rights" clause of the Bill of Rights - but if we restrict it to only things available at the time of passage these and many other items go away. So, do we really want to try to limit access to firearms to what was available during the time in question? Remember, those arms you are talking about were standard military arms of the day. Actually, standard "civilian" arms as the colonists were not a national military - the British and the Hessians were and they were supplied with less effective smooth bored muskets to the colonist's "rifles" - so an argument might actually be made for allowing civilian access to better firearms than available to the military. That being the case, civilians should be able to access military grade weaponry to the extent that they can individually afford it.Another thing that is often overlooked by people arguing against the second amendment rights - which, BTW, are not granted by the bill of rights but guaranteed as a natural human right that our government "Shall Not" infringe, is the prefatory clause regarding militias. Do you have any idea what and who our militias are? Well, according to the US Code (our national laws) Part 10 section 246 which defines the classes and makeup of our nations militias - we have two main classes - the "organized" militias (National Guard, State and local militias) and the "unorganized" militia - consisting of every able bodied male (sorry, but this code section is a bit sexist) who is a US citizen or professes a desire to become one who is between the age of 17 and 45. That's a lot of people - and they all are members of the unorganized militia and, at need, may be pressed into service when needed (ergo things like the "draft" come up). Now, if the SRHTF, it would behoove every member of that class to have their own military grade firearm in a caliber common to military use so they could use standard military issue ammunition - because it's a sure thing that the military doesn't stock enough spare rifles for that many people - ammo, maybe, the rifles themselves, no. So, if you take your citizenship responsibilities seriously you should have a rifle, at least a semi-automatic one, chambered for the current military standard round (currently in 5.56x45mm NATO). So, ultimately, the answer to your question is that the type of weapon needed by the citizenry is not defined by the Second Amendment and must be considered to be whatever is suitable for military or other usage and the right to those arms must not be infringed by the government. Clear enough?

I’m just going to add a few items to Alex Jackson’s answer:#8. Congress shall fund a militia training center, patterned the once-ubiquitous National Guard armories, in every city of 30,000 residents or more and in every county seat regardless of population. Each training center shall have, as a minimum, an armory where standardized ammunition for a selected standard weapon, indoor and outdoor shooting ranges, and classrooms for safety and training.#9. Pursuant to his #4, a refundable tax credit shall be set for the purchase of a person’s first firearm, equal to 120% of the firearm’s value to cover accessories such as case and cleaning kit, and for the purchase of a weapon standard to the local militia.#10. A new sports league, the National Militia Paintball Association, shall be authorized and given initial funding, so that militias may compete in realistic combat situations.