GoForSmoke:
It's relevant to the Brown Shirts being called the kind of militia referred to in the relevant 2nd Amendment of that Constitution.
Please keep up?
IMHO you are interpreting too narrowly the word "militia" as used in the Constitution. I think it was intended to mean what we nowadays call "the armed forces".
And (referring to Reply #44) it is certainly arguable that the Constitution means "militias that would unify in times of national threat rather than a large standing army". Indeed I think that is the only alternative logical interpretation.
But the references in Reply #5 suggest to me that the intention was to be able to oppose a militia under the control of a rogue President (I'm assuming they had already decided that the President would be commander-in-chief).
...R