Nevada "militias"

Discussion in 'Second Amendment and Legal' started by Litehiker, Oct 18, 2020.

  1. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    I've been looking into the various "militias" in Nevada just to see who the crazies are out there that may try to cause trouble after November 3rd if the Biden/Harris ticket wins.

    Nevada has a law that PROHIBITS armed private citizens from acting in ANY way that purports to be a military or law enforcement capacity. PERIOD.

    So I hope to hell I don't see any armed, camoflaged "militia" trying anything that even remotely appears to be supplanting law enforcement or military personnel. And if that does happen I also hope that law enforcement disperses them and/or disarms them. It is these "militias' that make many in this nation fear they will be the perpetrators of post-election violence. The existence of "militias" makes me glad that I am armed should their violence come to my neighborhood.

    Nevada, as with all other states, has a National Guard. They are the states' ONLY militia by a pre-WW I law that transformed all LEGAL state militias of the day into the National Guard. And the National Guards of the various states have served professionally, honorably and with courage in our nation's conflicts.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2020
  2. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    That was an impressive amount of propaganda bullshit to pack into a single post. Did you manage to keep a straight face the whole time you were spewing it? This bit of nonsense was particularly amusing:

    "They are the states' ONLY militia by a pre-WW I law that transformed all LEGAL state militias of the day into the National Guard."

    I shudder to think which bodily orifice you pulled that one from.
     

  3. quirky

    quirky Active Member

    193
    55
    28
    You obviously have no idea what the founding fathers meant by a 'militia'. It was far removed from your State sponsored National Guard. And you have even less understanding of why the National Guard was formed.

    Here is a clue, they are not sworn as the military to uphold the Constitution. Which means when the order is given they will open fire on the citizens just like they did in 1970 at Kent State University. That's why they used them and not the military.

    When push comes to shove the military will stand with the citizens, your weekend warriors
    like the local cops protect the powers that be. And those with the money.
     
  4. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    So... "Quirky", you think a self-appointed "militia" would be professional enough to do WHAT??

    Just WHAT are the missions you see a "militia" doing?

    If Biden and Harris win this election WHAT do you see the role of "militias" during the lame duck period up to January 20?

    All I see is a bunch of ultra conservative guys eager to use their nifty ARs but then not so eager when the guy next to them gets his lower jaw shot off in a conflict with real troops.

    "Militias" will dissolve quickly in the face of professionally trained and disciplined troops. The tragedy is the live that will be lost on both sides and as bad, the damage it does to American unity.

    Read the Declaration of Independence. It says we should change governments ONLY WHEN ALL OTHER METHODS OF CHANGE HAVE FAILED. If you disagree with an election's outcome you get to work preparing for the NEXT election and NOT to take to arms to dispute it. This is the true test of a democracy and what separates our nation from failed nations and dictatorships.

    So "Quirky" I do not take any comfort in the existence of various self-appointed, extra-legal, ALL WHITE "militias". In fact I feel they are a danger to our democracy as likely do most Americans, especially people of color.

    The above is not to say that I will surrender my firearms should laws be passed as happened in Australia. Instead I would bury them in the desert and forest and sit in jail. Hey, I've got two daughters who are attorneys. They may or may not be able to spring me. Either way I will not surrender my arms. It's known as "Civil Disobedience" and it has a long and respected history all over the world, as is now happening in Belarus where citizens are PEACEFULLY protesting an election in masses despite curfews and orders against large gatherings.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
  5. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    The only thing worse than a troll is a transparent and inept troll.
     
  6. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    So DP, when you post an opinion you are not a "troll" or when I post about accessories for my RUGER 57 I'm not a "troll" but when I post a cogently argued opinion about self-appointed militias I'm a "troll"??
    REALLY?
    I ask, why do you think my argument is "inept"? Were there historical mistakes? Other factual mistakes or is it that it just mightily pissed you off?

    C'mon DP, MAN UP, write a well-reasoned counter argument - IF YOU CAN!
     
  7. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    LOL! When did you do that? Was it when you spouted this bullshit...

    ...in an attempt to claim that all other militias are somehow illegal/illegitimate? The Dick Act (the 1903 legislation you're misinterpreting) did indeed federalize the existing state militias and rename them the "National Guard", or "Organized Militia". But they are not the only militia, let alone the only officially recognized one. See 10 U.S. Code § 346:

    (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.

    So the "unorganized militia" is "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"....which, by the way, vastly outnumber the "organized militia"...and are numerous in each and every state.

    The rest of your clap-trap doesn't even remotely rise to the level of "argument". You're just regurgitating left-wing propaganda talking points. This one was pretty funny in particular:

    Tell that to Cornwallis, or to any of the many armed resistance movements who faced invading/occupying military forces throughout world history.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2020
  8. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    Oh, and then there was this bit of nonsense:

    Even ignoring the fact that "purports to be a military or law enforcement capacity" is grammatical gibberish, Nevada has no such law. What it does have is a statute making it illegal for such groups...

    "to drill or parade with arms in any city or town of this state, without the license of the Governor"

    That in no way prohibits the mere existence (or other activities) of such groups, nor does it prohibit armed drills/parades by them outside city/town limits.
     
  9. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    Are you being paid to make yourself look like a fool, or is it just a hobby with you?

    Uh...and you somehow managed to interpret a ban on "threatening with deadly weapons" as a ban on the mere existence of militias? I pass out before I get that drunk. BTW...what the hell is "NEVADA CONSTITUTION-> NRS Article 1, Section 11" supposed to refer to? "NRS" is the "Nevada Revised Statutes", which are not a part of the Nevada Constitution. Also, what you quoted does not appear anywhere in the Nevada Constitution, let alone Article 1, Section 11. Here is that section in its entirety:

    "Section 11:

    Right to Keep and Bear Arms; Civil Power Supreme

    1. Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes.

    2. The military shall be subordinate to the civil power; No standing army shall be maintained by this State in time of peace, and in time of War, no appropriation for a standing army shall be for a longer time than two years."


    What you quoted is a snippet from NRS 202.320. "Drawing deadly weapon in threatening manner.", which has nothing to do with miltias.

    LOL! I hope you didn't suffer a hernia hauling those goalposts all the way to the other end of the field like that. Your argument was that private militias are "illegal". Stop trying to change the subject. Not only is it extremely dishonest (not to mention cowardly), you also suck at it.

    Oh, wait...are you this idiot? Or are you just mindlessly regurgitating his ill-informed bullshit?

    https://www.rgj.com/story/opinion/v...ada-laws-private-militias-shafton/5993946002/
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2020
  10. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    DP, I don't call you names and I wonder why you stoop to doing this. Do you need anger management? Breach a beer and kick back. Unlax Doc, and chill.

    Yeah, I made a mistake and attributed the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) to the Nevada constitution. I'd started to quote the Nevada Constitution and switched to quoting the NRS. Mea culpa!
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2020
  11. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    LOL! I wondered how long it would take before you'd realize how stupid you made yourself look, completely abandon even pretending to make any good-faith (or even reasonably intelligent) arguments and just resort to playing the victim of "name calling"...and lying about it to boot (I didn't call you any names).

    Are you starting to understand why it was so easy to peg you as inept at your trolling? It's ridiculously easy to spot when someone is being a pretentious fool who is just regurgitating talking points he's been spoon-fed because he has absolutely no idea what the hell he's babbling about. Your transparent schtick is as old as access to the internet by the general public, and you're not even any good at it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2020
  12. quirky

    quirky Active Member

    193
    55
    28
    When I first saw that some post back that is when I realized myself you sign up thinking you had a bunch of dummies to play with.
    You could have never imagine you'd run into a DParker uh.

    Stick around some he'll school ya.
     
  13. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    LOL! Still with the clumsy bullshit? No, that's not what you did. You started with a reference to the NV Constitution...then you referenced the NRS...then you referenced the Constitution again ("Article I, Section 11")...and then switched back and paraphrased a provision of the NRS. You're so confused that you switched between 2 different legal sources 3 times in a single statement?
     
    Magnum.357 likes this.
  14. Magnum.357

    Magnum.357 Active Member

    139
    54
    28
  15. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    OK "DP", I deleted one post where I mis-labeled and NRS statute as Nevada Constitution so as not to muddy your understanding of what follows:

    As per the Georgetown School of Law:
    WHAT IS A MILITIA?
    Federal asks state laws generally use the term "militia" to refer to able-bodied residents between certain ages who MAY be called forth by the government to defend the United States or an individual state.
    When not called forth they are sometimes referred to as the "unorganized militia".
    A group of people who consider themselves part part of the able bodied militia referred to as members of the militia under state or federal law is not legally permitted to activate itself for duty. a private militia that attempts to activate itself for duty, outside of the authority of the state or federal government, is illegal. (emphasis mine.)

    NEVADA STATUTES:
    Prohibitions on private military units: Nevada law makes it illegal to organize as private militias without permission from the state. Nev. Rev. Stat. 203.080 provides that it is a misdemeanor for "any body of individuals other than municipal police, university or public school cadets or companies, militia of the state or troops of the United States, to associate themselves together as a military company with arms without the consent of the Governor."
    (emphasis mine)

    It is also a misdemeanor for any group, "other than the Nevada National Guard and the troops of the United States to associate themselves together as a volunteer militia company or volunteer military organization to drill or parade with arms in any city or town" in Nevada, "without the license of the Governor." Nev. Rev. Stat. 412.604.

    Prohibitions on falsely assuming functions of law enforcement: In Nevada it is a crime for any person to "willfully exercise any of the functions or perform any of the duties " of a "public officer" without having duly qualified therefor, as required by law." New. Rev. Stat. 197.120.

    SO "DP" The above is exactly quoted from the Georgetown School of Law "Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection". It is clear about when militias ARE legal and under WHOSE authority they may operate, anything to the contrary notwithstanding.

    I await with bated breath to read your reply to this post.
    And PLEASE answer my previous question: WHAT do you see as the missions of a self-appointed, unprofessional "militia"?

    Eric B.
     
  16. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    Now THAT's funny. So far the only one here who has demonstrated a muddy understanding of anything is you.

    Who (besides you) is saying anything about active duty? What do you even think that term means? Are you under the deluded impression that simply being organized and training constitutes engaging in military/law enforcement roles? The statutory provisions on which the assertions you quote (you're relying on others to tell you what to believe because you're too poorly educated about the subject to do your own analysis) are based are prohibitions on private associations of individuals engaging in actual law enforcement and/or military actions. For instance, a self-styled "militia" may not take it upon themselves to post armed guards at a polling place. But they are NOT prohibited from associating as a group that they themselves describe as a "militia", training with (or without) weapons, etc. This is a very simple distinction to understand, so I don't know why you're having such a difficult time grasping it...assuming you're not being deliberately obtuse.

    Why would I answer that? It has nothing to do with anything I've said. And unless you're talking about a group actively conspiring to overthrow a legitimate governmental entity or something, it is utterly irrelevant to the question of whether or not the groups you're referring to as private "militias" may legally exist.

    So, we're still left with the fact that your assertion that the National Guard is the the only legal militia was ignorance-based nonsense, and that you clearly lied about your embarrassing "Constitution...no wait...statute....no, Constitutuin...er, statute" fumbling about.
     
  17. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    "DP", WHAT is the reason for the EXISTANCE of these so-called "militias"?
    Is it just so these guys can "play soldier"?
    I'm not seeing why they hell they feel the need to organize and name themselves as "militia". Are they trying to intimidate others? Do they feel they need to "defend" against something?

    I'll tell you this, here in Clark Co., NV the "militia" types that stood off Federal Marshalls were trying to keep them from taking Bundy's cattle in payment of grazing fees owed the Feds for his cattle grazing on BLM land.
    But the FBI later quietly rounded many of these "militia" up, thankfully. So yes, "DP", these boys want to exercise illegal power. Damned if I'll vote for any candidate that agrees with them.

    And that Orange Turd Trump who told the Proud Boys to "stand by" was absolutely the worst massage any president has ever said. Just one more reason to get rid of that dangerous bastard.
    Yeah, I call Comrade Trump names because he richly deserves every one of them. I respect you and your opinions, with which I disagree, so I don't call you names.
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2020
  18. quirky

    quirky Active Member

    193
    55
    28

    For the most part it's the media that labeled more than two white people with guns a militia.
    With any other race it's called disenfranchised.

    The FBI messed up and it's why no one is in prison, but they killed who they wanted to silence. They have a long tradition of that. It's a corrupt organization and always has been from the days of Hoover.
     
  19. Litehiker

    Litehiker Member

    82
    39
    18
    quirky, there were a lot more than two men that day with assault rifles staring down the marshalls.
    Who did the FBI kill? (names) When and how did they do this?
     
  20. DParker

    DParker Active Member

    166
    52
    28
    Again, you're using irrelevant questions to deflect from your ignorance of the facts. Why they exist has no bearing at all on the legality of their existence. As for the rest, I couldn't care less about your left-wing statist views. U.S. cities have been burned and looted for months by mobs of communism-preaching assholes,, who have also murdered people in cold blood, while the state has stood by and done nothing to stop it....and in some cases even encouraged it.