A Well Regulated Militia Is A Good Thing

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads in its entirety:

"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."  

So It Would Seem

Twenty-seven words.  No ambiguity.  It's pretty clear that the framers' intent was to ensure that the citizenry could resist a tyrannical government, and most people, including the Supreme Court, agree that that is exactly the fear that the framers had when drafting the Constitution - an overbearing government. According to constitutional scholars, as well as the Supreme Court, a militia is the citizenry, duly armed and ready to defend the security of the free state.  Every state has citizens who are the militia, and in some cases these militias are well armed, well trained, and well organized.  And several state militias are doing their job: protecting and defending the free state.  An Arizona militia for example, known as the Arizona Border Recon, has been doing the job this administration just won't do - patrolling the US-Mexican border.  They've done a good job, too.  They have identified and turned back drug smugglers, human traffickers, illegals, and more.  And even in Ferguson Missouri a few months ago, militias have taken to patrolling the streets due to the obvious absence of police presence in certain neighborhoods.  Unfortunately, the intellectually-challenged, over-educated "journalists" in the mainstream media outlets generally demonize these groups, claiming that they are far right, anti-government extremists and racists.  Apparently they don't understand - or perhaps blatantly disregard - the 2nd Amendment.  However, you won't see any criticisms of "racist" or "extremist" or "far left" journalists exercising their 1st Amendment rights.  Not a peep.

Liberty Counsel is actually on SPLC's Hate Watch

So why does the MSM get their knickers in a twist every time news of  some militias get in the news?  Well, because absolutely nothing can stand in the way of complete and total government control of we the people, of course.  For example, the pro-totalitarian, far, far left, extremist regressive newspaper in St. Petersburg Florida, the Tampa Bay Times (nee St. Petersburg Times), ran an article about Florida militias today.  Front page, above the fold, local section, headline  "In Florida, armed militias are waiting for a cause.''   Wait.  None of the militias here in Florida have done anything, no spokesman has said anything, but the Times knows they're out there just lurking and waiting for an opportunity to rise up and show off their guns.  Better get that headline printed in order to raise awareness of these loony groups out west and in the northwest. So how many Florida militia members did the St. Pete Times interview for this piece of journalistic tripe?  Well, none.  OK, how many 2nd amendment advocates were interviewed?  Ah, that would be none.  Well certainly concealed carry permits holders were interviewed, right?  Um, nope, nary a one. Who was interviewed, then?  None other than one Ryan Lenz, editor of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch blog.  Yep, American militias in every state are on SPLC's hate watch.   But CAIR isn't, nor is BLM.  SPLC even identifies the American College of Pediatricians as a hate group!  Baby doctors are a hate group?  But I digress.  The Times did interview some professor at University of Hartford and a police sergeant in a nearby county.  But the FBI spokesman, on the other hand, said anything that would catch the eye of the FBI simply isn't happening in Florida.  Peachy.  But that's what passes for journalism these days. 

Are constitutionally protected citizen militias worthy of hate group status?  Or are the politically correct purveyors of hate more deserving of  that distinction?  Maybe the answer to those questions is precisely why political correctness is on the wane, and nationalism is on the rise.  It's past time to become free again.