"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." —Amendment II, United States Constitution The Second Amendment is regularly invoked by opponents of gun control, but H. Richard Uviller and William G. Merkel argue the amendment has nothing to contribute to debates over private access to firearms. In The Militia and the Right to Arms, or, How the Second Amendment Fell Silent, Uviller and Merkel show how postratification history has sapped the Second Amendment of its meaning. Starting with a detailed examination of the political principles of the founders, the authors build the case that the amendment's second clause (declaring the right to bear arms) depends entirely on the premise set out in the amendment's first clause (stating that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state). The authors demonstrate that the militia envisioned by the framers of the Bill of Rights in 1789 has long since disappeared from the American scene, leaving no lineal descendants. The constitutional right to bear arms, Uviller and Merkel conclude, has evaporated along with the universal militia of the eighteenth century. Using records from the founding era, Uviller and Merkel explain that the Second Amendment was motivated by a deep fear of standing armies. To guard against the debilitating effects of militarism, and against the ultimate danger of a would-be Caesar at the head of a great professional army, the founders sought to guarantee the existence of well-trained, self-armed, locally commanded citizen militia, in which service was compulsory. By its very existence, this militia would obviate the need for a large and dangerous regular army. But as Uviller and Merkel describe the gradual rise of the United States Army and the National Guard over the last two hundred years, they highlight the nation's abandonment of the militia ideal so dear to the framers. The authors discuss issues of constitutional interpretation in light of radically changed social circumstances and contrast their position with the arguments of a diverse group of constitutional scholars including Sanford Levinson, Carl Bogus, William Van Alstyne, and Akhil Reed Amar. Espousing a centrist position in the polarized arena of Second Amendment interpretation, this book will appeal to those wanting to know more about the amendment's relevance to the issue of gun control, as well as to those interested in the constitutional and political context of America's military history.

"The United States Code is the official codification of the general and permanent laws of the United States of America. The Code was first published in 1926, and a new edition of the code has been published every six years since 1934. The 2012 edition of the Code incorporates laws enacted through the One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, the last of which was signed by the President on January 15, 2013. It does not include laws of the One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, enacted between January 2, 2013, the date it convened, and January 15, 2013. By statutory authority this edition may be cited "U.S.C. 2012 ed." As adopted in 1926, the Code established prima facie the general and permanent laws of the United States. The underlying statutes reprinted in the Code remained in effect and controlled over the Code in case of any discrepancy. In 1947, Congress began enacting individual titles of the Code into positive law. When a title is enacted into positive law, the underlying statutes are repealed and the title then becomes legal evidence of the law. Currently, 26 of the 51 titles in the Code have been so enacted. These are identified in the table of titles near the beginning of each volume. The Law Revision Counsel of the House of Representatives continues to prepare legislation pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 285b to enact the remainder of the Code, on a title-by-title basis, into positive law. The 2012 edition of the Code was prepared and published under the supervision of Ralph V. Seep, Law Revision Counsel. Grateful acknowledgment is made of the contributions by all who helped in this work, particularly the staffs of the Office of the Law Revision Counsel and the Government Printing Office"--Preface.

Collection of essays representing differing points of view about the militia movement of the 1990s.

A leading constitutional historian argues that the Founding Fathers viewed the right to bear arms as neither an individual nor a collective right, but rather an obligation a citizen owed to the government to arm themselves and participate in a well-regulated militia.

The 1864 Census for Re-organizing the Georgia Militia is a statewide census of all white males between the ages of 16 and 60 who were not at the time in the service of the Confederate States of America. Based on a law passed by the Georgia Legislature in December 1863 to provide for the protection of women, children, and invalids living at home, it is a list of some 42,000 men--many of them exempt from service--who were able to serve in local militia companies and perform such homefront duties as might be required of them. In accordance with the law, enrollment lists were drawn up by counties and within counties by militia districts. Each one of the 42,000 persons enrolled was listed by his full name, age, occupation, place of birth, and reason (if any) for his exemption from service. Sometime between 1920 and 1940 the Georgia Pension and Record Department typed up copies of these lists. Names on the typed lists, unlike most of the originals, are in alphabetical order, and it is these typed lists which form the basis of this new work by Mrs. Nancy Cornell. Checking the typed lists against the original handwritten records on microfilm in the Georgia Department of Archives & History, Mrs. Cornell was able to add some information and correct certain misspellings. She also points out that no lists were found for the counties of Burke, Catoosa, Chattooga, Dade, Dooly, Emanuel, Irwin, Johnson, Pulaski, and Wilcox.

From the beginning of our republic the concept of a citizen soldiery, organized throughømilitias, has undergirded American military philosophy. This nation fought the Revolution, the War of 1812, and the Mexican War, and began the Civil War, relying on volunteer militias and only a skeletal professional military force. The Civil War demonstrated the need to adapt state militias to the requirements of modern war, yet the United States retained its original philosophy in what became the National Guard. The Rise of the National Guard describes in thorough detail the evolution of the state militia system to a more federally controlled National Guard during the crucial years of development. The subject is important because the "citizen soldier" and "militia-national guard" traditions form one of the two pillars on which American military policy is built; a professional, regular military force is the other. Jerry Cooper's detailed research, unique examination of the experience of individual states, and careful analysis make this work the standard treatment of the subject.