How can states reclaim control over their own militias and national guard units?

Question

The Federal Government decides to "Federalize" State Militias and National Guard units, what can be done to stop this aggressive government practice?

Answer 1

They can't. The National Defense Act of 1916 established the modern day National Guard. It was made a component of the regular Army by the National Defense Act of 1920. An amendment to the Act in 1933 made the National Guard a full time reserve component of the Army. The federalizing of National Guard units is not aggressive. The National Guard is part of our national defense system.

I've tried to answer your question honestly and correctly. As for the comments of the previous responders, they are idiots so ignore them. A good friend of mine who grew up in 1950-1980's Soviet Union laughs at uninfomed twits who call our government "totalitarian" as they have no clue as to what they are saying. While I don't agree with the President's polices, the ill mannered twerp who refers to him as "Der Fuhrer" has absolutely no knowledge of the horrors committed by Hitler. As for the ignorant little primate that refers to Republicans as "monkeys," name calling is always an excellent substitute for intelligence, which seems to be lacking.

Answer 2

The national guard has duel status, that means it is part of the militia and part of the US government at the same time. The Militia act of 1903 (Dick act) reorganised the militia due to some terrible performances of the militia in the 19th century. There are two parts to the militia, the organised and unorganised militia. The organised militia is the national guard and the unorganised militia is every citizten from 17 to 45, though there is no organised (logically as the name suggests) part to this entire militia. (to the extent that in vietnam they conscripted people, rather than using the unorganised militia which would not have been able to leave the country anyway) The US constitution gives the US federal govt the power to arm the militia, this was also considered to be the power to disarm the militia, therefore the 2nd amendment was introduced to protect the keeping of arms. The national guard is armed by the federal government, the unorganised militia is not. The fact that arms are given to the national guard really does not make them any less a part of the militia. It is not a matter of people who oppose the 2A think that these are the same thing, they are the same thing, only with different status. The national guard can be sent abroad, because it is part of the military, but it is also part of the militia. The main problem people have is when people say that the 2A protects only the militia, rather than individual citizens, which is wrong, the 2A protects the militia through protecting individual citzens.

Answer 3

Impeaching Der Fuhrer might help. Contrary to what some think, states can initiate impeachment proceedings at the grass roots level.

Answer 4

As long as the people learn not to ever elect a Republican monkey again.

Answer 5

Storm your Representatives with e-mails, call, etc. This is another strategy of totalitarianism.