Juan_Bottom wrote:In the slave-holding South, militias existed only to hunt down fugitive slaves. They also formed the basis of lynch mobs, and they were the first armed men to respond to John Brown's Raid. They also interfered with the Federal Government's ability to police. These Militia's seem inarguably the parent of the KKK to me. The KKK also formed neighborhood watches and Militia's. The Ossian Sweet Case involving Clarance Darrow is a fine example of this.
The Black Panthers formed Militias to protect their communities from intimidation, drug dealers, and outside influences. These Militia's are the very reason Ronald Reagan signed a law forbidding armed groups from patrolling. Black militias with guns. . . *shivers*
This is what I'm talking about. In each case, these Militia's were law-abiding, armed, and operated with the consent of their communities. They also lead to arms-races between these two communities. But what's the difference? I'm not reading it wrong, I'm explaining why your argument is dangerous and inadequate. Under your plan/dream/idea, if the KKK wants to form a volunteer militia to protect your school, then technically there's no way for the government to tell them "no." They couldn't stop them from adopting highways, so how can they stop them from creating your armed citizen militias?
And more importantly, why would you or anyone want to stop them? I mean, I know why I would want to stop them, but I think this idea is silly.
Well, if all the KKK is planning to do is keep folks from killing kids, or keep highways clean, I don't care what they do; ditto Black Panthers. If they're not using the guns illegally I couldn't care less how many of them own guns. On the other hand, not long after I moved where I now live, some KKK burned down the home of a black woman, and I have BIG problems with that, as did this community.
It should be up to the communities, like any Neighborhood Watch program.
I also live in the state where someone in neighborhood watch is claiming the "stand your ground" rule for defense because he shot a teenaged black boy; he claims the boy was aggressive, up to no good, whatever, although the people who knew and loved him say otherwise. The man is on trial, and no longer part of the neighborhood watch for that community. Similarly, if any KKK or Black Panthers did something questionable within their communities, even as part of a neighborhood watch, I'd hope they'd be on trial as well.
Meanwhile, how they'd be told, "No," is if the community Neighborhood Watch organizer refused their application.
If Connecticut did have Black Panthers patrolling Sandy Hook, think whatshisface would've chosen that school to go mental at? I kinda doubt it.