TIL in the 1950s, while conducting civil rights protests in Monroe, NC against a strong Ku Klux Klan opposition, the NAACP enlisted protection from a local NRA chapter, who were determined to defend the local black community from racist attacks.

The original comment I replied to

The reason the people have guns is to over throw a tyrannical government

So that is the argument I (and I guess you?) are refuting.

So the 2nd amendment was essentially: "instead of standing armies to keep the peace, lets have citizens exercise a sense of civic duty and be organized into militias to be called up by the states or the government in times of need". It appears we agree here.

James Madison, the principle writer of the Federalist Papers

Of the Federalist Papers, 85 in total; Hamilton wrote 51, Madison wrote 26, Jay 5, and Madison & Hamilton collaborated on 3. This isn't a big deal, but I am a huge admirer of Hamilton and I don't think he gets his due.

My point about nationalism (I won't go back into that military history quagmire, although I enjoy discussing it) is that standing armies are not viewed with nearly as much suspicion anymore - most democracies (especially Western) have standing armies under civilian control with no threat to their population or government. I was attempting to contrast it with the views of the founding fathers at that time. (perhaps this contrast was lost or not effective)

I was not trying to say standing armies did not exist, or did not at times fight for ideals. However, it was extremely uncommon at that time for people to join a professional army out of a sense of duty. THAT is my point, THAT is the difference between then and now. Certainly many people at this time join the Army for a steady paycheck and an education, but when shit hits the fan, many others will join up because they have a sense that they have an obligation to fight for their country. That is nationalism, and that is why I included it.

So, to summarize my inclusion of nationalism.

In the past - standing army, not too trustworthy, could be used against the people by a tyrant. Army is more likely to be loyal to an individual rather than an ideal. Disband the army if not at war.

Now - standing army, fairly trustworthy, not really used against its own citizens. Composed of people who want to fight for their country, not an individual. Keep the army around even if not at war, just in case.

/r/todayilearned Thread Parent Link - en.wikipedia.org