No, the 2A does not guarantee anyone's right to form private, non-state armed forces

[UltraChad]

I doubt it, but let's see if you can read and reason:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Everyone concentrates on the last half of that statement. And I agree it does mean just what it says.

That's because that's the important part.

The first half is the reason for the other half, not a prerequisite for the right.

HOWEVER, most also ignore the first half, in particular the first 4 words: "A well regulated Militia..."

The people who focus on that ignore the "being necessary to the security of a free State" and have a strong tendency to outright reject the "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." part.

Who did they mean to be the regulating body? Why the GOVERNMENT of course.

No, even Politruck got this right. You're wrong.

Militias weren't intended nor empowered to act on their own. They were and still are a reserve part of the military. Anyone with half a brain would know that.

That's literally what a militia is.....a civilian force separate from the military.

No they aren't a reserve part of the military. That's why you and everyone else hates them so much....you don't control them and that scares the fuckin' piss out of little statist authoritarians like yourself.

But then I'm sure you've never been credited with having half a brain.

Comshaw

Comshaw

Says the ignorant anti-American...American. LOL

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

In Heller, SCOTUS found that 2A gives us our right to have guns without any connection to service in militia.

 

[UltraChad]

In Heller, SCOTUS found that 2A gives us our right to have guns without any connection to service in militia.

Yup....thankfully SCOTUS can actually read unlike most Democrats.

 

[Politruk]

Legality of militias:

Many militia groups claim to be a modern incarnation of the Minutemen, the guerrilla fighters, colonial militia, and backwoodsmen who fought and harassed British soldiers during the American Revolution. One group within the militia subculture, the Three Percenters, places a special emphasis on this connection, rooted in the myth that only 3% of America's able-bodied men actually fought the British during the Revolution (the real number was closer to 15% over the full course of the war) and that a similarly small, dedicated movement could do the same to "liberate" the US from home-grown tyranny. Ironically enough, this idea is not too dissimilar from Marxist vanguardism, which makes a lot more sense once you realize that Mike Vanderboegh, founder of the Three Percenters, was once a New Left activist in the 1960s and 1970s before he converted to libertarianism.[9]

At least a few militias claim to be available to their states for defense purposes. However, many, if not most, states have laws against private armies such as these or any sort of paramilitary organization not directly authorized by state or federal government. Fortunately for militias, these laws often stipulate that a "private army" involves, among other things, being paid (which effectively every militia lacks), making the average militia not a private army according to a strict reading of the law. As such, they are, by and large, allowed to exist nearly entirely unmolested instead of being shut down by the hundreds.

Legally speaking, the National Guard (which is not any sort of citizen militia) is considered the "organized militia" under US federal law (state laws generally include the State Defense Force as well, if they have one), while the "unorganized militia" is all males of a certain age according to the same law. The Civil Air Patrol also serves as a civilian auxiliary of the US Air Force. Twenty-two states plus Puerto Rico also have their own "state militias" or "state defense forces" separate from the National Guard and under the sole command of their respective governors, though training standards vary wildly. Most state defense forces are very lightly armed, if at all, and work primarily to augment the National Guard for peacetime duties, such as combating wildfires and providing aid to disaster areas. Community emergency response teams (CERTs) and neighborhood watches serve a similar purpose at the local level. In addition, during the Cold War, there existed various civil defense and continuity-of-government programs at the federal, state, and municipal levels, though much of this infrastructure has since fallen into disuse.

To the extent that there is a citizen (or "unorganized") militia, it is a concept found in state constitutions used to bridge a gap in federal law declaring all able-bodied males between 18 and 45 to be part of the "militia". Should the "unorganized militia" need to be called to service at the federal level, one might presume that the proper way to do so would be to enact a draft using the Selective Service infrastructure. Things in the US would probably have to be quite bad for it to get to this point, as conscription had been discontinued in 1973. Historically, private citizens have been "drafted" (or "deputized") at the state or local level under the "militia" clause on a temporary basis, usually to help with emergency services, but while this was common in the 1800s, it is very rare today. For example (and to show why this isn't that popular anymore), firefighters used to be "drafted" from the local tavern in places where there was no regular fire department, but this inevitably led to problems with arson by unemployed people needing a quick job.

 

[Politruk]

The most telling passage from the above:

"However, many, if not most, states have laws against private armies such as these or any sort of paramilitary organization not directly authorized by state or federal government. Fortunately for militias, these laws often stipulate that a "private army" involves, among other things, being paid (which effectively every militia lacks), making the average militia not a private army according to a strict reading of the law. As such, they are, by and large, allowed to exist nearly entirely unmolested instead of being shut down by the hundreds."

Note that nobody even suggests private armies have any constitutional protection.