State Senator Randy Brogdon is under scrutiny for comments he made to the AP, which appeared to support militias. However, the senator is now saying his comments were taken out of context. Meanwhile, the battle over states' rights and the Second Amendment has gained traction in his home state of Oklahoma.
A debate is brewing in Oklahoma within the Republican Party over the creation of militias, which Oklahoma State Senator Randy Brogdon, who is also running for governor, says the AP took his quote out of context.
The AP article in question stated:
State Senator Randy Brogdon, a Republican candidate for governor who has appealed for tea party support, said supporters of a state militia have talked to him, and that he believes the citizen unit would be authorized under the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
The founding fathers "were not referring to a turkey shoot or a quail hunt. They really weren't even talking about us having the ability to protect ourselves against each other," Brogdon said. "The Second Amendment deals directly with the right of an individual to keep and bear arms to protect themselves from an overreaching federal government."
We hear what the senator has to say about this supposed confusion. And we also speak with Oklahoma State Senator Steve Russell, who says he doesn't see any need for a militia in Oklahoma.
Today's Takeaway: Over 50 and Unemployed, Texting in Class, The Future of Yemen, and Why It's So Hard to End Poverty in America
Today's Takeaway: Dharun Ravi, NATO Summit, David McCullough, Chen Guangcheng and Unemployment for Older Americans
Why Increased Immigration is the Solution for America's Ailing Economy
Why Texting in Class Might Actually Be a Good Thing
The show is a co-production of WNYC Radio and Public Radio International, in collaboration with The BBC World Service, New York Times Radio and WGBH Boston.
Major funding provided by:
Comments [9]
Why are people raising such a fuss? It is a clear right under the second amendment.
I would love to see the liberals take the northern half of the nation. Then the Americans can laugh at the liberals as they destroy themselves from within.
The Indiana Guard Reserve (IGR) is authorized by the Indiana Legislature under IC 10-16-8. It is a subordinate unit of the Indiana National Guard and assists the Guard, when it is ordered to state active duty, in protecting / responding to natural disasters or other needs of the community. The Governor is the Commander-in-Chief of the IGR. The Adjutant General of Indiana commands the Indiana National Guard, the Indiana Air National Guard as well as the IGR. The IGR is, therefore, a well-regulated militia, is not political, and is obedient to the Constitution of the United States and the State of Indiana. (It is in our oath.) And yes, the IGR does train at Camp Atterbury and does assist in operations at that federalized facility.
The Indiana Sedentary Militia has no connection with the Indiana Guard Reserve or the Indiana National Guard. It has no tie to the government (federal or state). The Indiana Sedentary Militia does not train at Camp Atterbury. This clarification is not intended to raise doubts about the character of those who serve in the Indiana Sedentary Militia. I don't know them personally as they are not part of the IGR.
@Modest yet liberal proposal: NO! I want US to have the warm half! Let them all move to Alaska. ;-) I do wholeheartedly agree with your idea, though. Maybe they will quit whining, then! ANYTHING to make them stop their incessant bellyaching!
I don’t see what the big deal is.
23 other states already have “state recognized” militias.
Oklahoma is already bordered by two states that have “state militias” That being Texas and New Mexico. Indiana also has one. It’s called the ISM (Indiana sedentary militia.) AKA “Indiana Guard Reserve”. The southern section of the ISM is trained at Camp Atterbury. Right along with the Indiana national guard.
All the other state militias seem to be relatively respectable groups of people.
The proposed Oklahoma law just resembles what we (in Indiana) already have.
So what is the big deal?
The senator that suggested that these were ordinary normal people when referring to these nutjobs is delusional.
This idea is not new, they are following in the footsteps of other delusional extremists of our times like the Ayatollah and his revolutionary guard or "Basij" in Iran. The main purpose of these militias is to put down dissent, with force if necessary.
So when they say they are fighting for Freedom and Liberty, they mean 'their freedom' and 'their liberty', even if and especially when they are in the minority.
The whole notion is as undemocratic and un-American as you can get.
Small people, with no new ideas, but they got to have their guns to promote them.
I agree with the comment by Mr. Leach above. Thanks for the incisive, probing questioning of the interviewees (NOT). You give someone like Sen. Brogdon air time without offering even a mild challenge to his outrageous position. I know your show seems to be geared toward short segments and a faster pace, but interviewing like this with no countering only diminishes the qualtity of your show.
I wish that whenever someone like Mr. Brogden is being inteviewed, the hosts would call them out on their hyperbolic rhetoric. Mr Brogden stated that the Federal government was taking away freedom and liberties(I hear this alot). How about asking them for specific examples.
Mr Brogden is ill-informed at best or deliberately misleading at worst concerning the 2nd amendment. It does not state, "in order to protect ourselves from criminals or an overreaching Federal government, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It states that the reason to keep and bear arms is to make sure that a well regulated Militia is necessary for the security of a free State.
If one actually reads the Constitution, you would see that in Art 1, Sect. 7, the Congress has powers for organizing Militias for various purposes, and that in Art. 2, Sect. the President(you know--Obama!) is Commander in Chief of the Militias of the states.
Mr. Brogden and those of like thinking are constantly distorting what the Constitution says and means, either because of ignorance or for questionable motives.
H i folks,
Is there such a dearth of interesting news that these crazies have a chance to get on the radio? Just because they are not screaming does not mean they are not crazy!
Mentos candy in soda will save us from the"govmint". They produce a big explosion, too..
How about we let the southern half of our country secede. Let the ultra conservatives run their own country (or county). Liberals can all move north (we get DC). I'd be happy to do without half the population (the constant nay-sayers). No more welfare from blue states to red - let the red states take care of themselves.
Leave a Comment
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.