Canada Nixes Long Gun Registry: Gun Owners Rejoice

That is excellent, Raplh.

Then you can always renounce your citizenship and move to a country that doesn’t have provisions for conscription. Problem solved.

You accept certain things when you’re an American, among them are:

1. You may be compelled to be a juror.
2. You may be compelled to serve in the United States military if Congress decides that a draft is necessary.

I’m against all war in principle and most wars in practice. If this country were to start conscripting during wartime and I felt the war was unjust I’d likely leave and renounce my citizenship because I’m well aware it’ll take years before the American public tires of the conflict.

That would be the honorable route to take rather than breaking a pretty basic law.

Ya know, I just checked my copy of the U.S. Constitution…and I don’t see anything SPECIFICALLY about federal conscription in there. In fact, the only place I see it spell out something that directly affects duties or restrictions on an individual is the XIII Amendment, in which individuals are PROHIBITED from owning slaves.

Congress might indeed have the implied power to impose conscription, but that, by itself, does not make it a basic civic duty etched in stone that all must accept as one of the cornerstones of being an American.

I mean, would you also say that if you don’t like the way Congress mandates CAFE standards for automobiles, you should pack your bags for Canada, too?

Coming of age at the very end of Vietnam, I thought drafting young men to fight in totally pointless wars was probably unconstitutional and just made the military industrial legislative complex all the richer. I really think Ron Paul was right in that most wars we have fought in the last 60 years had little to do with the direct defense of the USA.

You seemed to have missed that Second Amendment thing about a militia. You do know that the militia was not a voluntary club where you got to shoot guns? It was the law that said you had to come when your country ordered you to the colors. Today, we would call that conscription aka the Draft.

The only war in which the militia was used was the so-called War of 1812. (200th anniversary this year.) Except for the Civil War all the other 19th Century wars were fought with volunteers. Despite what you probably learned in school about the War of 1812, this war was not about American rights at sea. The British revoked the Orders in Council that we objected to just before Congress acted and we could have called the whole thing off. It was called completing the American Revolution, i.e., grabbing Canada. It was as dumb as any war we have fought and the Brits and Canadians kick our collective ass. The war was a complete disaster and only redeemed by the “extra innings” Battle of New Orleans.

So if you don’t think the Constitution allows the government to compel military service then you don’t really believe in the Second Amendment.

“Except for the Civil War all the other 19th Century wars were fought with volunteers”

Do you just make the stuff up as you go along? When you deviate from the NRA-prepared script you make mistakes.

Gee Mike what did make up? That the Militia Act 1792 had a firearms mandate and required quarterly drill with proscribed penalties for failure to meet your obligations?
Or that after the War of 1812 the militia played no significant role in Wars of the 19th Century?

FYI the Mexican War was fought with a mixture of US Volunteers and Regular troops. The Civil War was generally fought with US Volunteers until losses outstripped recruitment and the Federal Government resorted to conscription to fill the ranks. The Spanish American, like the Mexican War, was fought with a mix of US Volunteers and Regular forces.

Had you done time for your admitted crimes perhaps you could have spend some time education yourself in between your cellmate using you as his bitch.

JKP:

The Militia Acts can be considered the implementing legislative for the Militia clause of the Second Amendment. The Militia Act laid out the requirements that the citizen must meet to satisfy a federal, and not a state, requirement. The Militia Act wasn’t written to empower the states, it was related to direct federal service. To say that the word “draft” is not in the Constitution does not mean that the concept would be foreign to the founding fathers. The concept of conscription is required military service. It doesn’t matter whether they pull lottery numbers or force your enrollment in a militia.

@tdiinva:

You’re throwing out a lot of sound and fury, but so far have not said anything that establishes the central point you appear to be defending (established by MichaelB above:) namely, that Federal conscription to fight a foreign war of choice is something central to the responsibilities of all American citizens.

I have stated that while Congress may indeed legitimately have the power to enact such conscription, to say that it is a cornerstone of the American experience is bullshit.

The existence of the Militia Act does nothing to advance your point. Congress also has the power to enact tariffs (and did so under the current Constitution from the beginning.) Are paying tariffs so central to the American experience that if one disagrees with them, one should “leave and renounce [your] citizenship]”?

That is nonsense.

@tdiinva:

Please re-read my previous post. As you can see, I referred to the “U.S. Constitution”, “federal conscription” and the powers that the federal Congress has. At no time did I mention any powers that the several States have.

The example of the War of 1812 is inapposite. If I recall correctly, several states (in New England, I believe,) declined to provide their respective state militias for federal use outside the state.

So, I repeat: while the Congress may indeed have the legal authority to order conscription for the federal army and order its use in a foreign war of choice (as opposed to repelling an invasion of the homeland or suppressing a domestic rebellion,) to say that this is some sort of cornerstone of American citizenship is, in my judgment, just as foolish as saying the same about obeying EPA or OSHA regulations.

Thanks for that refreshing comment.