Are their any laws about allowing "Militia" in the streets
Yes, you can see the Constitutional rights related to bearing arms, free assembly and ultimately to self defense.
Who here is in favor of condoning such a thing as Militia on the streets?
No one. We empowered the government to create police departments and passed laws criminalizing certain conduct for a reason.
The problem is that when the government abdicates its responsibility to enforce those laws, which is unarguably what the Democrats endorse, it leaves the citizens no choice but to re-assume the burdens that government was formed to take off their hands. The Democrats are breaching the social contract by refusing to prosecute violations of law.
Does it depend if they are a white or black militia
Not in the least. Black militias are just as welcome to protect against violations of the laws of the country. They are not however any more welcome to decide to violate the laws in pursuit of higher goals than white militias would be.
All people, black and white, are entitled to self defense. When defending others all people are subject to the risk that they will be acting wrongfully and be liable to prosecution.
What should the minimum age of participants in a militia be?
Don't even understand this question. What is the minimum age to participate in self defense? Are children allowed to kill attempted rapists if they can?
What kind of training should they have?
Self defense doesn't require training. If you want trained law enforcement, we have this group called "police" that could be enforcing our laws instead.
How do you hold the Militia accountable?
Same way you hold anyone else accountable. Self defense is a right, defense of others entails a certain amount of risk at law.
Does it matter if Militia come from outer state?
Not really. Fighting anarchy is the responsibility of all citizens.
How the crap are Militia considered LAW and ORDER?
Not sure why you think they are. Militia is only involved because order has broken down and laws are being violated in ways that threaten the very principles upon which our Constitutional order is based.
Law and order would be the police arresting rioters, arsonists and violence committing protestors, prosecutors filing the applicable charges and courts putting them in jail. Which is exactly what the local Democratic governments have abdicated with orders to defund the police, force them to let the rioters and looters proceed unchecked and removing any requirements for bail. Its exactly what the activist prosecutors have been put in place to do, and have done by announcing they will not press or even file charges against criminals arrested in connection with riots unless they were involved in direct violence (which they make no evidence to determine).
Don't whine about a break down in Law and Order when you support exactly the conduct that refuses to apply that law and order. What did you expect that no one would respond just because the Democrats are able to put in power a handful of elites who refuse to do their duty?
What we also see are witches being burned, Tutsis being macheted, blacks being lynched, and the list goes on.
Really? Where did you see a witch being burned? Show where you've seen blacks being lynched. You're lying, you have not seen any of that. Reading in a history book about witches being burned has NOTHING to do with modern justice or lack there of. The results of blacks being lynched was decades of justice reform, civil rights improvement and massive amounts of protective laws being put in place. All of which is being undermined by these actions today.
You are bearing false witness.
As an aside, driving 30 miles from out of state in order to carry a gun while putting themselves in the middle of a protest in someone else's city can in no way be characterized as "defending themselves".
Really, and is driving to a protest for black lives then somehow also false if you're doing it in another community? What makes defending racial justice as a roving partisan different than defending constitutional principles?
Fact is, the damage that the left is doing to the country is nationwide even though the burning, looting and crime are currently localized. It's every citizens problem when the local government chooses to let mobs violate the rights of its own citizens in pursuit of their own partisan political advantage.
Wielding a gun to protect somebody else's used car dealership - how does that work, anyway?
Same way as defending it with fists I'd imagine. Nothing about having a gun for self defense is out of the ordinary in that context.
I note, you didn't choose to respond to the NY Times link. It looks in that article like the first shots they can identify are coming from someone other than the kid, who fires after he hears shots and is being charged. According to the link in the second event they heard 16 shots (far more than the kid fired) and one of the people he shot had a pistol in hand.
What about going to a protest means you should be carrying a gun? really nothing. Going to a planned riot and session of wanton criminality on the other hand, sure does.
What if those evil hoodlums don't stop smashing the cars when you tell them to?
I take it then that smashing cars doesn't justify shooting them to you. What if they were beating a man with a baseball bat? Okay then? What if they are throwing incendiary devices at police officers? Okay then? What if say, they're deciding to rape a woman in the middle of the day on a subway platform? Okay then?
If you can't understand why a situation where people feel entitled to smash and burn cars needs to end, then you're not really advocating for anything but anarchy. The rule of anarchy is always defend yourself. Militias are doing exactly that, even when they travel, by trying to stem the sense that there is no consequence to such abusive behavior by looters and rioters.
What if they don't stop when you aim your guns at them? Do you shoot the for rioters not listening to armed, self-appointed militia telling them what to do?
No, they get shot for engaging in violent anarchy in direct violation of our laws. They get shot because complicit politicians seeking partisan advantage refuse to do their sworn duty and enforce the laws - laws that have been there in some cases for our entire history and that no rationale person thinks are the wrong laws, or even in any way racist. They get shot for being personally culpable in creating a system that is ruled by anarchy and the might makes right precepts of anarchy. We had a system based on justice, these individuals are facing the consequences of breaking the social constructs that protect them. They get shot because they'd rather be shot than accept that the police should be enforcing the laws.
The whole situation is created by people who don't believe in the responsibilities of citizenship while they abuse its privileges.
Now what are you going to do when the anarchy stretches into your house and the houses of your friends and family? I somehow don't believe you're going to roll over and let them do what ever they want to you and yours, but you're perfectly content if they're doing it to someone else.