"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."
This, the Second
Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of
America is probably the most recognized of the Bill of
Rights. What, however, constitutes a well regulated
militia is less understood.
If we look back at the
concepts understood by the Founding Fathers we might
better understand this concept. The Founders recognized
two aspects of life, and applied them to the governments
that they existed in and later into the government they
were to create. They recognized that life, itself,
required a recognition of the distinction between the
moral (mind) and physical (body) aspects. The moral
aspect determined morality, circumstances and developed
opinions and decisions. The body, on the other hand,
reacted to the direction of the mind once the decision
was made. This concept was applied to the republican
forms of government that developed even under British
rule. Each of the colonies had a degree of autonomy
dependent upon the specifics of the colonies charter.
Ultimately, each was subject to the decisions of the
Parliament in London which, from time to time, exceeded
what the colonists perceived to be the limits of it's
authority. The Stamp Act of 1765 was an example of that
authority. In this act the taxes were mandated with
virtually no input by the colonies. Although subsequently
repealed, with some exceptions, the Act was truly
"taxation without representation."
Each of the communities
had established both a mind (Committee of Safety) and a
body (militia) comprised of mostly the same people. Older
members might join only the Committee while younger ones
might join only the militia. Generally, however, the
majority of the membership of each was made up of the
same people. Why, then, was there a need to have the two
functions?
Firstly, the militia was
a military unit. Discipline, chains of command, order and
regimentation were necessary to the performance of the
militia. Without the strict adherence to the military
approach, the lack of discipline might prove fatal in the
event the militia were called to duty.
On the other hand, the
Committee debated issues of the day. Those who might be
privates and officers could sit in the forum of the
Committee, which would be contrary to the discipline of
the militia, and debate the political issues of the day.
Ultimately, the Committee would have to call the militia
to service after determination of necessity was made.
Once the order was given to the militia to activate, the
militia responded with the discipline and demeanor
necessary for it to function effectively. Regulated by
the direction of the moral entity (the Committee) the
militia could properly be defined as well regulated.
Today we have lost the
lesson of the separation of the two aspects (morality and
action) because of the conditioning and educational
indoctrination of the contemporary government. Perhaps
this lesson from the past will help us to reestablish the
well regulated militia which is necessary to
the security of a free state.
Return to Sons of Liberty Index
Go to Next Sons of Liberty
Go to Previous Sons of Liberty