(I posted the entire comment, I think it important on a couple of levels):
Fully reprinted Donald Cowen's commentary regarding the so called Militia involved with the Bundy Ranch, http://www.forwardprogressives.com/bundy-ranchs-armed-lunatics-asking-welfare-can-continue-sit-around-work/
"As to your statement "While I know some people are sick and tired of hearing about anything related to Cliven Bundy, I believe these people are providing us with a prime example of the kind of anti-government lunacy that’s prevalent within the Republican party" it should be noted that political affiliation has nothing to do with this issue.
I am a republican and a Veteran, however I support the concept of rule of law and I whole heartily support responsible gun ownership and those rights associated with them. I do not agree with Bundy and his supporters and there are a lot of republicans who know the difference between legitimate show of force as compared to unlawful use of force.
Bundy and his band of outlaws are not patriots and have done a major disservice to those law abiding citizens who are gun owners. I agree that these idiots have crossed the line but lets tone down the political party rhetoric and focus on the solving the problem!
The Second Amendment right is two fold in that it protects the right of the State to organize, arm and train its own State Military Force, hence the organized aspect of the militia. The problem is that we have a band of people who have organized themselves, unlawfully, as a military force, thus if they open fire they will be doing so without authority of law!
Furthermore if they do open fire due to a counter response by the government they will not be able to claim "Self-defense" as legal justification for their use of deadly force because the law of self defense as rooted in our nations history specifically prohibits an a "initial aggressor" to claim the right of Self defense.
The second prong of the Second Amendment rights specifically deals with the private right of action to keep and bear arms for the purpose of lawful self defense of "hearth and home." In this situation a person doesn't need to have government permission to use a firearm whereas he does need to be involved in a sanctioned organized Militia, operating collectively under official color of state law to claim legal justification for offensive combat operations!
These ass clowns who call themselves "militia", "patriots","freedom fighters", "oath keepers", "Sovereign Citizens" ...etc need to learn the concept of self defense for defensive purposes and leave the collective category of self defense for offensive military operations to those of us who are properly trained, well equipped, and extremely organized!
It is up to the States respectively through it own sovereignty to declare war on the feds if it should come to that. Taking the law into your own hands will strip you of the protections of the constitution because at the core the constitution is law. You cant place yourself above the law then expect to claim its protection it just doesn't work that way!"
(I do not know how much I am allowed to reprint but this being in the commentary section of the article it would likely become buried in short order. I believe this particular piece of commentary is worthy of consideration by us here in the DU so I hope I can be forgiven for reprinting it whole as it was intended by it's author.)
= new reply since forum marked as read
