“THAILAND: Licence to Arm Civilians against Muslim Insurgency” or Why RKBA Matters.

[jody]

THAILAND: Licence to Arm Civilians against Muslim Insurgency

Nipa, a single mother, maintains a vigil through the night armed with a shotgun at the entrance to a Buddhist village on the outskirts of this southern city. With her, on a recent night, were 15 other men and women, similarly armed, who are part of a civilian-defence force.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Researchers estimate that over 30,000 civilians have been trained to shoot to help the armed forces, whose current troop strength, according to unofficial estimates, is close to 60,000 in the south. The Volunteer Defence Corps, for instance, is armed with the U.S.-made M-16 and the German-made HK-33 assault rifles.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

"People carry firearms in the south because it is a necessity," says Krisda Boonrath, deputy governor of Yala province. "I also carry firearms to stay alive." "The firearms given to state officials are warfare firearms," adds Maj. Gen. Chanint Jantarachot. "The firearms possessed by citizens are all done through a legal process."

* * * * * * * * * * * *

This case of armed civilians attacking the Malay Muslims at prayer feeds into the narrative that has shaped the political violence in the troubled south. The current upsurge in violence is the latest in a cycle going back to the late 1960s, when a previous generation of militants waged a separatist campaign through the 1970s and ‘80s to reclaim the provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat for the Malay-Muslims.

If government can’t protect individuals against crime, then it’s up to the “unorganized militia” (see 10 USC 311) to do that job.

If the “unorganized militia” doesn’t act then criminals including terrorists win by default.

[Dogmudgeon]

1. "Why RKBA Matters"

Because you favor it?

:shrug:

There is a low-intensity civil war Thailand that is ratcheting up. This is RKBA like Fort Sumter was RKBA.

--d!

[jody]

2. Did you read my statement "If government can’t protect individuals against crime, then it’s up to

the 'unorganized militia' (see 10 USC 311) to do that job.

If the 'unorganized militia' doesn’t act then criminals including terrorists win by default."

What part of that don't you understand?

[rfranklin]

4. You don't understand what you are posting about...

that's pretty obvious.

[jody]

5. The article is about arming Thailand's version of our unorganized militia to protect against

criminals.

That's obvious to anyone who read the article.

[billh58]

15. Using the term

"criminals" overly simplifies what amounts to participants in a long-running religious war, with bitter adversaries on both sides of the fight. In many respects, both sides engage in "criminal acts." The Thai government was overthrown by a military coup d'etat in 2006, and the country was under martial law until January, 2007. Thailand's newly elected (December, 2008) "democratic" government remains embroiled in accusations of corruption, and has a tenuous hold on power.

As with many unstable Southeast Asian governments, Thailand has a long history of government corruption, military coups, and civil and religious unrest. Hardly a good comparison to the United States, or any Western country, especially in the area of "civil rights."

Many of the more remote areas of Thailand, and its surrounding neighbors, have never been "protected" by their various governments, nor do they recognize national borders. As a result, almost all remote villages in these regions, and their inhabitants, have been armed for decades. They are effectively governed by local "War Lords."

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. Explain it then.

[Euromutt]

7. More "Border Ruffians" than Fort Sumter

Imagine living in Kansas in the 1850s, up to 1862, and having pro-slavery goons coming in from Missouri to cause havoc in an effort to make your state pro-slavery. Now also imagine that the neasert Federal troops are rather a long way away, and you have no reliable means to communicate with them in the event the "Ruffians" show up anyway. Wouldn't you prefer it if you and your neighbors had firearms with which to at least attempt to defend your township, rather than be left to the mercy of the cross-border raiders?

[rfranklin]

3. As I read that excerpt the Thais are shooting the Malay Muslims...

so it is actually the citizen militia that is committing crimes in this case.

"The mosque attack shows how arming civilians could exacerbate this conflict," says Rungrawee. "It only heightens communal tensions."

Don't you even read these things?

[jody]

6. I read the entire article and DU's rules limit posts to four paragraphs. First it is clear that

Thailand's government is doing what our Constitution expects from Congress, "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia" and that includes the "unorganized militia".

Second Thailand has "gun-grabbers" who want to disarm law-abiding victims but leaving law-breaking criminals armed.

Do you support such policies?

[Euromutt]

8. Don't *you* even read these things?

The violence in the south, which has seen over 3,400 deaths during the past five and a half years, is testing the limits of the relationship between Thai Buddhists, who are the majority in this country, and the country’s largest minority, the Malay Muslims, who are the dominant community in the three insurgency-torn provinces.

Emphasis in bold mine. There's a bit more to this conflict than one instance of Buddhist ethnic Thais killing eleven ethnic Malays.

[rfranklin]

13. Thank you.. which proves the point that this is not about crime...

its an ethnic civil war and is certainly not a justification for arming everyone in America. right now it seems only a matter of time before we have the right wing nutjobs shooting up town hall meetings and other venues because they're mad about losing the last election. I own a 9mm and I can use it, but I don't suffer under the illusion that I am invincible like many "gun nuts" do.

[Euromutt]

14. It's illustrative of a wider principle

Namely that when a government in unable and/or unwilling to provide protection for its individual citizens, it thereby relinquishes the authority to deprive its citizens of the means to protect themselves. The context of this can vary--from an ethnic/sectarian conflict in Thailand, to simple violent crime in the United States--but the underlying principle remains the same.

I'm also going to point out you used the "arm everyone" canard. Nobody is suggesting that everyone in this country be issued firearms; merely that citizens who do wish to arm themselves not be deprived of the option to do so.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

17. Can you quote where the OP argued for arming everyone in America? Please try and be honest.

[Euromutt]

20. I can't be the first person to coin the term "arm everyone canard"

I mean, that one gets used so often, it can't not have a name.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

21. Sorry for the confusion I was asking rfranklin.

[billh58]

9. Are you

seriously advocating the formation of vigilante posses in the US? The conflict in Thailand is the result of religious unrest that has been going on for years. The Thai government is barely able to control its own military, much less rebels in more remote areas. How does the RKBA in the United States of America compare to the "need" for the Thai people to defend themselves against armed religious zealots?

The Thai situation, and the situations in other Third World countries who have been experiencing civil and religious strife for decades, or centuries, are poor examples for support of the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. The individual right to keep and bear arms, and the formation of "unorganized militias" are two very different scenarios. The last time citizen militias were necessary in the USA, was during the Civil War, and those soon became Federalized.

I'm not attacking your post, but pointing out that you did not state a rationale for posting it in the Gun Forum. This is nothing more than international news about religious turmoil similar to the situation in the Philippines, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, and has very little to do with American gun ownership rights.

That is, of course, unless you are among those who are stockpiling ammo for the upcoming rednecked wet-dream of a second Civil War, or CWII as they affectionately refer to it.

[jody]

10. Government organized, armed , and disciplined militias are not vigilantes as you imply with your

red herring.

The “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” adopted by the United Nations says “Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”

In many countries government does not protect those rights and law-abiding citizens can act as a militia to protect life, liberty, and security of person or submit to criminals.

All states have an unorganized militia subject to be activated and used by governors.

For example, Hawaii says:

§121-1 Militia. The militia of the State shall consist of every resident able-bodied citizen of the United States who is seventeen years old or older and under forty-six years of age and all other able-bodied residents of that age who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States. The militia shall be composed of four classes:

(1) The federally organized and recognized national guard,

(2) The remainder of the organized militia to be known as the Hawaii state defense force,

(3) The naval militia,

(4) The unorganized militia.

The unorganized militia shall consist of those members of the militia who are not members of the national guard, the naval militia, or the state defense force. The unorganized militia shall be subject to active military duty only when called or ordered into the service of the State for such period as is required. They may be assigned to existing organizations of the Hawaii national guard, the naval militia, or the state defense force, or otherwise as the exigencies require.

Note the Hawaii state defense force apparently is part of the “unorganized militia” defined by 10 USC 311 and that Hawaii includes females between 17 and 46 in the militia whereas federal law limits the militia to males ages 17 to 45.

The unorganized militia has been used by governors in many ways. For a few of those please visit the State Guard Association of the United States.

We in the United States are fortunate because our government’s authority is granted by a body of sovereign individuals known as We the People.

We the People also declared that certain rights are inalienable/unalienable or pre-existing and do not depend upon our Constitution for their existence.

One of those is the right to keep and bear arms for defense of self and state.

[billh58]

11. Your response did

not address the point of my post: what does the situation in Thailand have to do with the the right of Americans to keep and bear arms? How are the two very different scenarios even remotely related? I am not aware of any area, or group of people, in the USA which is under armed attack by religious zealots, or where large groups of citizens are fearful for their lives. If there WERE such a situation in the USA, do you not believe that our existing armed "organized" government-funded militias could, or would, protect American citizens?

Please do not presume to lecture me on Constitutional, Federal, or State law, as I am well-versed in the various legal principles, which incidentally have absolutely nothing to do with my previous post. Fyi, the Hawaii law was written with the thought of another Pearl Harbor in mind, and NOT as a response to civil, or religious unrest. We are a State which is uniquely vulnerable to foreign attack because of our geographical location.

I am not what you would consider a "grabber" in a typical knee-jerk reaction to ANYONE who questions your motives. I fully support ALL Americans' 2nd Amendment Rights, AND any lawful restrictions to those rights (registration, felons, etc.).

Again, my previous post did not question your rights, your interpretation of the "law," or anything of that nature. I DID question, however, the purpose of comparing Thailand oranges, with American apples. The need to stay alive in Thailand in the absence of government protection is very different from the right to protect yourself against a possible, and random threat in the United States.

And the dictionary definition of a "vigilante" states: "somebody who punishes lawbreakers personally rather than relying on the legal authorities." If there ARE no "legal authorities" available, then vigilantism is perfectly understandable and acceptable, and occurs daily in the United States when someone shoots an intruder, or an attacker, and is called "self-defense."

The formation of armed "unorganized" militias as substitutes for government protection agencies, or "unorganized," widespread, and aggressive vigilantism, is neither justified nor necessary in the United States, and hasn't been since the beginning of the Civil War -- unless the KKK is viewed as a "noble" and patriotic organization, or Ruby Ridge and Waco as shining examples of "unorganized" militias.

[TheWraith]

18. In Thailand, the government cannot defend the local people against violence.

That's also true of a lot of places here in the US. Just ask a resident of inner city Baltimore whether they feel fully protected by the government. Does it matter if you're in fear of your life from religious zealots or a criminal organization like American gangs?

[billh58]

19. In many parts

of Thailand, and its SE Asian neighbors, the government has never defended the "local people" in remote villages. They have defended themselves for decades, and are in effect governed by local War Lords who charge them "taxes" for additional protection. It is a way of life for these unfortunate people.

Comparing the turmoil in many completely lawless and war-torn parts of Southeast Asia, Africa, South America, or the Middle East, with any place in the USA, however, is ludicrous. That Baltimore, and many other US cities, have high crime rates is a given, and you absolutely have the right to "keep and bear arms," for your own protection.

But I will take an unarmed night in the very worst slum in Baltimore, over a locked-and-loaded Sunday (or Friday) afternoon in downtown Sana'a, Yemen, Kano, Nigeria, or almost anyplace in the Golden Triangle of SE Asia -- anytime. Been there, and to even worse places, and believe me Baltimore is a walk-in-the-park compared to many places in the Third World, whether you're armed, or not.

When was the last time you had to step over the mangled body of a child in a sewage-filled street, that absolutely no one gave a shit about? When was the last time that you saw wild dogs eating the rotting bodies of an entire family in the burnt out ruins of their bamboo hut? The crimes of these people? They were of a different religion, or religious sect, and their "government" looked the other way as they were slaughtered like animals.

[Treo]

12. Almost every state in the Union has a State Defense Force separate from the National Guard. NT