The Right to Militia

If the above title sounds strange it is because we don’t use or understand the term militia as the founders of our nation did. Militia is a verb also. Not many people are aware of the material you are about to read. It is empowering and illuminating and facilitating and confidence building for your ability to defend your life, liberty, possessions and your loved ones forever. The following is an edited response to me from Jon Roland of

“This conversation is still misusing terms in ways that are concessions to the attempt by our adversaries to hijack them and reframe the terms of debate. It is suggested that you re-read all the materials on militia starting at [don’t follow that link until you have finished with everything on this website]

“First, the Latin-literate Founders used the term "militia" with the same meaning it had for the ancient Latin’s, which best translates as “defense activity.” Because they used words polysemously – giving the same word different meanings in different contexts, and sometimes at the same time – “militia” was secondarily and sometimes used to refer to “those engaged in defense activity,” or, in other contexts, “those required to engage in defense activity.” Substitute these phrases for the word militia in the Constitution and other writings of the Founders and what they said will become much clearer.

“The term as used in the Constitution is broader than just instances of it, such as “state militia.” There was a focus on militia organized according to state or federal law, but that does not define the term or restrict the concept. It is not limited to states or local communities. It could be, and was, in the territories, at sea, in other countries, and at the level of action by single individuals. Although they never discussed it, their concept applies even to other than human beings. Mold defending itself against bacteria in a Petri dish is militia.

“In the past some of our friends have made the mistake of treating militia as something that depends on there being a formal law. It is not. It arises out of the social contract. Indeed, it is the duty created by the social contract. We can call that a kind of "law" – the constitutions of nature and society, augmented by the constitution of the state when a society acquires dominion over a territory and has to defend it. But even the word “state” as used by the Founders meant “society-with-territory,” which may or may not have a government. (Most states do have governments but government is not an essential part of the concept.)

“When tied to militia, the right to keep and bear arms is not just about self-defense. It is about defense of the community, the society, which happens to include oneself. The correct plea in a self-defense case is not “I had to defend myself,” but rather, “I had to enforce the law against assault, which in this case was an assault against me.” It should always be cast as an act of militia, even if one is acting alone.

“The concept of “well-regulated” can apply to both self-regulation and group regulation. It applies to doing well any activity that may be done well or badly, whether it is defense, law, medicine, engineering, navigation, accounting, or room cleaning.

“Don't let your use of language become infected with corruptions of terms that are sought by those who would infringe our rights. The field of language is just as much a battlefield as any other. You need to be well-regulated militia when fighting on the battlefield of terms as well.”

Therefore, it is obvious that all people have as much a right to act in a coordinated fashion in militia as they do to act in militia as an independent individual. Your right of self-defense, that even Piers Morgan would grant you, also concedes the same right to act together in defense of the community state or nation. All people have a right, then, to regulate themselves well in coordinating their combined effort to militia. We know from Rev. Samuel Rutherford that men have a God given right to self defense and to defend themselves by forming kings and governments. Locke has shown that the sole purpose of lawful government is to defend the property consisting of life, liberty and possessions of every member of that society. Bastiat has shown that all law is nothing more than the combined individual right of self defense to defend the property of all. We know from Thomas Jefferson in the declaration of Independence that when governments pervert their purpose and harm the property of the people that the people acquire the right to combine the individual rights of self defense against the overturned government. Also Algernon Sidney confirms that God ordains government for the protection and good of the people and when that is overturned so is their ordination and authority and they may be resisted with force if necessary.