“The second amendment guarantees the right to a militia to guard against federal tyranny,” former “Republican” representative turned unelectable attention troll Adam Kinzinger posted on X.com. “But if a president can use that force against its own state, against the wishes of that state, then it is no militia at all and a clear violation of the second amendment.”
He apparently believes he’s scored a “Gotcha!” to be used against Donald Trump in his actions to clean up crime in Washington, D.C. While the president’s largely successful efforts do raise some constitutional concerns (that can be resolved by going after real crime instead of guns), Kinzinger hasn’t scored the witty zinger he evidently believes he has.
First, the Second Amendment codifies the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The militia preamble, while core to a purpose envisioned by the Founders, did not invalidate citizens being armed for private purposes.
Second, he is limiting the militia to the National Guard, an argument the gun prohibitionists used prior to the Heller decision, even though it had no evidence to base its noisemaking on. (When challenged to provide evidence to back its declaration that the Founders only intended for the Second Amendment to apply to militias and not to individuals, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California dithered, avoided, and did everything but substantiate its claims.)
True, per the United States Code, the National Guard is one of the classes composing the militia, but so are citizens, and the limitations on physical abilities, age, and gender would no doubt be ripe for challenge in light of civil rights laws that have been enacted since the code was enacted. And as lawyer and Constitutional scholar Dr. Edwin Vieira has shown, the so-called “unorganized militia” of United States Code is in itself an example of Congressional “malfeasance… beyond the pale. Under no circumstances may Congress leave the Militia unorganized, unarmed, or undisciplined–let alone knowingly and intentionally impose such conditions,” Vieira instructs. The very term is “an oxymoron.”
Kinzinger’s assertions are refuted by something even more fundamental, though, and it is knowledge that’s been around for a while, but that Democrats and other gun prohibitionists making the National Guard argument would prefer we don’t know about.
The second amendment guarantees the right to a militia to guard against federal tyranny. But if a president can use that force against its own state, against the wishes of that state, then it is no militia at all and a clear violation of the second amendment. pic.twitter.com/F2ht5EQwae
— Adam Kinzinger (Slava Ukraini) (@AdamKinzinger) August 24, 2025
As the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States Senate Ninety-Seventh Congress observed back in 1982:
These commentators contend instead that the amendment’s preamble regarding the necessity of a “well regulated militia… to a free state” means that the right to keep and bear arms applies only to a National Guard. Such a reading fails to note that the Framers used the term “militia” to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and that Congress has established the present National Guard under its power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia.
That Kinzinger is evidently unaware of this (or aware but deliberately lying by omission about it) is no surprise. Noting the last time that he tried to prove his awareness of and capabilities with guns, he and phony “pro-gun Democrat” Lucas Kunce ended up bandaging a press flack’s arm.
Add ‘Potential Criminality’ to Kunce/Kinzinger Range Negligence Mishap
Agenda Once More Bleeds Through in Latest National Gun Policy Survey
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
The National Guard is not, and never has been “The Milita”.
It is part of the Standing Army, on reserve duty.
I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.” – George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
ol’ adam continues to demonstrate his irrelevance.
only thieves in government want people disarmed fearing they will be put against a wall ….America has historically preferred rope
Larry Tribe and company tried to make the militia exclusive argument back in the 1970’s and were hacked to ribbons in the law journals for their efforts. The armed citizen is presupposed in the existence of the militia and not vice versa. It is the collective of able bodied citizens who arm themselves of their own free will who are called by the church bells in to militia service. Many colonial statutes recognized the necessity to use the citizenry in such manner during times of emergency and actually had statutes REQUIRING citizens to maintain arms and ammunition and be ready… Read more »
Three words: Shut up Kissbutt!!!
Apparently that little twerp doesn’t know that the militia (Minutemen at Lexington and Concord as one prime example) pre-existed the 2nd Amendment and that the national guard didn’t come into existence until nearly 150 years later………………
EIigibIe for hanging.
“Adam Kinzinger (Slava Ukraini)”
Tells me all I need to know
Guys like this, don’t help the GOP’s chances in the mid terms. Even though he’s out of office, many of the less than politically active 2A supporters, will view him as speaking for the party.
Which the party in and of itself is far from being pro 2A, but still, stunts like this don’t help.