Militia and Solider Obviously, militia and solider have different meaning, but some point of those two words are very similar. Like a militia and solider both armored, and have ability to fight in a war. But after we checked the dictionary and the website , we can see that the meaning of militia is changing all the time ,and the meaning of militia is different in different countries. According the Oxford English Dictionary, “Militia” is Nonprofessional Solider, organize by themselves, the body of soldier in service of a sovereign or a state. Subsequently: a military force raised from the civilian population of a country or region, ,esp.to supplement a regular army in an emergency, freq.as distinguished from mercenaries of professional …show more content…
And we know that the militia was not this meaning during the America Revolution.
The so called militia took over the government. The just use violence to show off their powers. And I believe that is very cowardly behavior. I once learned that, the real powers man never use violence to manifest how capable they are. Because violence never makes people surrender willingly. Back to 1770s and 1780s, the American militia is group of young men who armored and help the neighbors to protect their property away from the war and help US army to fight against the England army. And even in the WWII, the militia is the important part of the US army. In another country, the militia is still mean “militia”, for example, in Australia and China, the militia is exceedingly important for the country, the militia is the formal solider or the people who have been trained as a solider, they have ability to protect people around them when the war happened, and the militia also is the professional disaster relief team when natural hazard happened.(Like the Wenchuan Earthquake in
When understanding the types Guerilla warfare tactics dates back to the earliest recorded history and continues today, as it will in the future. A formidable strategy used against the military by the Native Americans to preserve their way of life. After the Civil War in 1865, U.S. settlements exceeded ...
Cress argues that the right to bear arms should be given only to organized militia groups. However, it was clear that the Founding Fathers made no distinction between the militia and the people. The Second Amendment allows individuals to own guns and to be able to protect themselves. If the Founding Fathers wanted gun ownership to be for militias only, they would have specifically stated that in the Second Amendment. Cress ineffectively argues that the militias were an important part of protecting the people when in reality they were not well-trained and may not have been committed to the cause which rendered them ineffective. Therefore, Cress’ argument is not reflective of the attitudes of the Founding
The US Army’s official birthday is June 14, 1775, however its origins are much earlier than that. During British colonialism, citizens often had to take up arms to defend themselves, primarily against the Indians, since the British did not have a significant military presence in America. “Two concepts that still shape the American military can be traced to this period. The first is the idea of the citizen soldier, who picks up his gun in wartime and returns to civilian pursuits in peace. The second is the concept of universal obligation…” (Brown, page xiii).
“Through out most of their history, Americans freely defended their nation from threats both domestic and foreign. Only in their greatest conflicts - the Civil War, World War I, and the lead - up to World War II” (Forbes) they had to implement the draft. A draft, "called conscription in most countries, is the process by which the United States has, in the past, gathered members of its military. Generally, a man called to serve through the draft would serve for two to four years" (Rich). "Toward the end of the increasingly-unpopular Vietnam War, President Nixon led efforts to end the draft and create an all-volunteer military"(Nyden). The difference between a draft and an all-volunteer army is based on the quality, decisions, and the money.
The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states "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.
“A well-regulated militia” is stated in the prefatory clause. In United States v Miller, it was explained that “the Militia comprised of all males physically capable of acting in concert for a common defense.” “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” is a part of the operative clause. This statement recognizes that the second amendment is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans. The second half of that statement, “keep and bear arms” addresses what right the people have. It referred to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity. The connection between the two shows the original reason for the creation of the second amendment, and then what that right is. “A well-regulated militia” demonstrates the original reason for the creation of the second amendment which was to protect the states from potential infringement of the federal government. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” therefore demonstrates that the right of the people that cannot be infringed on by the federal government is the ability of the citizens to have and use
A central argument put forth by gun-control advocates is that since there is no longer a "militia", that individuals should lose their rights to own a gun. They often assert that the term "militia" should now be defined as each state's National Guard or Reserves. On the other hand, anti gun control advocates argue that the Second Amendment clearly states that the people have the right to own and bear arms even if they are not part of an organized militia.
This is called the right to bear arms and is guarantee under the U.S. Constitution. The second amendment clearly states that “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.” The first ten amendments are also known as the Bill of Rights. Therefore, the pro-gun activists are right. The right to bear arms like the right to free speech should be protected. However, the pro-gun activists do not the fully understand the reasons for this right. The right is for protection not from burglars but from Indians and the state. At the time the U.S. Constitution was written, many American families were living on the frontier lines where there would be a continual threat from Indians. The U.S. had a standing army but it was too far and is not readily available to protect these families when Indians would attack. This made it necessary for families to have guns in the home. The Indians were an external threat. An internal threat was the government. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote that if a government failed to protect its citizen and instead became the enemy, the citizens had the right to overthrow it. After the Revolutionary War, the Founding Fathers did not want to replace an oppressing army which was the British with one of their own. They felt that an armed citizen was the best type of army. This is what was meant by a well regulated militia. The militia would consist of every able-bodied man who was trained using their own arms for purposes of local defense and in actual military events. This local well regulated militia is the equivalent of the National Guard. In present times, we no longer have the need to protect ourselves from Indians. As for an oppressed government, we have our National Guard. The original intent of the right to bear arms does not apply to modern
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. (Amendment II 1791)
I am writing to you so share with you my reasons for not being conscripted to serve in the Vietnam War and why I don’t believe in conscription. I would like to explain my reasons for not wanting to be conscripted, I hope you take these reasons into serious consideration and understand why I am standing by my thoughts.
"The soldier is the Army. No army is better than its soldiers. The Soldier is also a citizen. In fact, the highest obligation and privilege of citizenship is that of bearing arms for one’s country” (-General George S. Patton Jr). Here within our borders we are the lucky ones, we have been blessed with the pleasure of so many brave men and women; to volunteer in the world's greatest military; and put their lives on the line for something that they believe is a moral obligation. But, think of some other countries, that have conscription (the practice of ordering people by law to serve in the armed forces) laws. We as a nation have some laws on conscription, and if you are male and above the age of 18 you have already signed the slip of paper stating that in the time of war; if our great nation re-instated the draft then there is a great chance you will be serving on the frontline of the next Great War. This brings me to my first topic of this page, is it ethical to have a draft? My second topic that I will discuss will be on if it is morally acceptable to "draft dodge". What I mean on the second topic is if you have a right; that morally allows you to not go fight in the war.
"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. " Since the beginning of America the people have had the right to defend themselves with arms in any circumstance. The government has not infringed this right for hundreds of years until recently. The people’s government today has tried everything in their power to restrict the people’s right to defend themselves with fire arms.
“Why would you want to interview me when there are plenty of people back home that would be easier to interview in person?” asks John Stout. He is about 5’11, has dark black hair and his eyes are a rich chocolaty brown. He is tan and has a strong muscular body. John is currently deployed in Bagram Afghanistan. He departed on July 7th, 2016 and will not return until April of 2017. He grew up in Fort Ripley, MN and graduated from Brainerd High School in 2014. John is very close with his Mother, Father, Brother and Sister. He grew up with a wrench in his hand and always helped his Father work on project cars and fixing things around the house. To John, family is everything. His family always took vacations and every summer, he gets to travel around the United States for Army training. John grew up in a military family. His Father works as a Warrant Officer in the Minnesota National Guard and his Brother, Curtis, is in the Marine Corps and is also deployed right now.John has always wanted to serve his country
A soldier is an enlist individual, man or woman that fight in the military for his or her country. There are numerous reason has to what it means to be a good soldier. Being a good soldier varies depending on the individual. A good solider lives up to the army values, which are duty which is to fulfill your obligations by being able to accomplish tasks as part of a team, loyalty n being able to bear true faith and allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, the Army, your unit and other soldiers, honor, being able to give up to Army values, integrity, do what’s right, legally and morally, personal courage, face fear, danger or adversity (physical or moral, selfless service, being able to put the welfare of the nation, the Army and your subordinates before your own and respect, being able to treat people as they should be treated
The militia seemed harmless at first, claiming to fight for the people. I realized too late that they were only serving themselves. They ravaged our village, stealing our food and first-born children to join their ranks. I begged them to leave the children behind, offered them more food and supplies, and still they did what they wanted.