Yes, very good detail. The Dick Act. Very good. We legally under the Dick Act. Now all the world knows why we act that way.
I didn't know that part about "required" but that sort of puts a kibosh on Assault weapons bans with any teeth. No wonder.
We review this all the time and most of you sissies are breaking the Dick Act because you don't have an AR-15. Is that it?
http://americanlivewire.com/the-dick-act-gun-control/
Here is an article that discusses the Militia Act and history, consequence, etc.
the Dick Act is written ins complex and nebbish washington style "saber-metrics" type inside baseball language. when you shovel through it all, the dick act does the following:
1) accepts and re-affirms the Militia Act of 1794, particularly the requirement that all militia members (every person born with testicles from 16-60 unless they are in prison, insane or incapacitated) must own a weapon for militia service.(specifically a musket of .75 caliber...)
2) redefines the standard militia arm from a .75 Caliber Brown Bess Musket to a weapon "of a type in common use" (which today would be the AK, a Stoner arm, or an SMG like the HK P90)
3) creates the "Organized Militia" as the national guard and reserves, and the "Unorganized Militia" as the rest of us who are eligible to be called up from the "Unorganized" to the "Organized" militia, and from the "organized militia to the Army. like the baseball farm teams system
4) subsumes all state militias (of which there were several at the time) into the national guard, but pretends that the "Organized Militia" is still run by the states by making the various governors the commander in cheif of their state's national guard forces unless they are called up nationally.
5) makes the whole re-organization more palatable to the now subservient states by assuming the costs of running the national militia, despite the fact that every dime of national funding came from the states in the first place. every state simply assumed they would get more out than they paid in, but somebody had to foot the balance of the bill. but that's Future America's Problem...
in the end the dick act sabotages the state's sovereignty, and creates unconstitutional organizations (standing army, national guard, military reserves, etc...), but unless some STATE takes offense and claims that they are harmed by this act, then there can be no challenge since only the states have "standing" to argue against the act, and the states are disinclined to rock the boat.
EDIT: the article you linked was interesting but incorrect. the Dick Act is NOT repealed, it has been modified again and again by committees and commissions but the act remains as the foundation of the pentagon, the dept of defense, and the entire military-industrial complex.
the dick act remains in force, just as the Militia Act of 1794 remains in force, as modified by the Dick Act of 1903 (passed in 1903, not 1902 or as i said, 1908, i had to check. weed gives me double vision.) much as the income tax remains in force, despite being modified pretty much every year since it began in 1913 (the older ones were struck down by the courts) the details of the income tax and tax regulation change constantly, but the law remains in force, uninterrupted since 1913. the dick act has likewise been in force since 1903, and the militia act since 1794.
