Standing armies

In creating its new charter of government, U.S. political leaders kept the importance of the militia and the traditional distrust of a standing army in mind. James Madison, for example, noted that liberty could be kept secure because... 

Roy G. Weatherap. Standing Armies and Armed Citizens An Historical Analysis of the Second Amendment. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 2 (Pall 1975), pp. 1000-1001. 

The defendant argued that his conviction violated his right to keep and bear arms under the Kansas Constitution, which states The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power. ... 

Under Henry III, the arming of citizens is extended. An arming of the whole people rather than a large standing army gradually becomes the basis for England s defense. 

In the bloodless Glorious Revolution, William and Mary defeat English King James II, abolish the standing army, and restore— to Protestants only—the right to keep and bear arms. 

Vermont That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves and the State—and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. (Chapter I, Article XVI)... 

Virginia That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. (Article I, Section 13)... 

The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is set in contrast with Troops which they were forbidden to keep without the consent of Congress. The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored standing armies the common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the Militia—civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion. 

Adam Smith s Wealth of Nations, Book V, Ch. 1, contains an extended account of the Militia. It is there said Men of republican principles have been jealous of a standing army as dangerous to liberty. In a militia, the character of the labourer, artificer, or tradesman, predominates over that of... 

Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States 708-709 (Carolina Academic Press 1987) (1833) (emphasis added). Justice Story calls the right of citizens to keep and bear arms the palladium of our liberties. He viewed the private ownership of firearms as reducing the need for the maintenance of large standing armies by promoting the vitality of the militia, and laments that militia participation is on the decline, fearing this will result in fewer Americans being armed. 

Finally, the many newspaper articles and personal letters cited indicate that, at the time, Americans viewed the Second Amendment as applying to individuals. This is confirmed by the First Congress s rejection of amendments that would have directly and explicitly addressed the Anti-Federalists standing army and power over the militia concerns. 

We have found no historical evidence that the Second Amendment was intended to convey militia power to the states, limit the federal government s power to maintain a standing army, or applies only to members of a select militia while on active duty. All of the evidence indicates that the... 

The Confederacy had its own standing army to provide for, and it had its own administrative stmcture and system in place to answer those medicinal needs. But it had its own special problems too. Lacking the industrial infrastmcture of the North, and saddled with a stifling blockade of its coast and port cities, the dmg story in the South is one of ingenuity and even daring. 

Brooks 2004-2005, p. 730. See also Kinsella 2011, p. 115— recall that the development of the distinction between combatant and civilian in the late nineteenth century assumed the existence of professionalised standing armies engaged in set-piece battles with one another... identifiable through their mihtary regalia or presence in specific formations of war . 

And, finally, one share to the person who shall have most or best promoted the Fraternity of Nations and the Abolition or Diminution of Standing Armies and the Formation and Increase of Peace Congresses. ... 

He has kept among us in times of peace standing armies and ships of war without the consent of our legislatures. 

---