Democrat Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) has proposed legislation to address the issue of non-governmental paramilitary operations or militias (my words, not his). Our previous coverage got a lot of traction and input from readers.
Here’s one example.
10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
The militia is a state military force, and the National Guard is a sub-military force of the militia…per the above, it’s known as the organized militia.
Those individuals between 17-44 not part of the organized militia…per the above are known as the unorganized militia.
So, federal law recognizes and specifies the individuals comprising the unorganized militia. This causes a problem when trying to impose bans.
In addition, in the Constitution, there is a clause for arming a state militia when called into the actual service of the US by an act of Congress. If you read the debates in the Constitutional Convention on this clause, they said it would give Congress 3 options…it could choose…1-by the federal government…2-by their individual state governments…or…wait for it…3-BY THE INDIVIDUAL MILITIA MEMBERS. This was before the 2nd Amendment. So, there was a right to own a firearm, and since this arming clause has never been changed, it remains. This also means these individuals have the right to purchase one. In fact, because of this, it could be argued they are required to have one. If so-called assault weapons are military-grade weapons, then they could never, by general law, prevent or ban members of the unorganized militia from owning one.
Also, last time I checked, every State has a similar militia break down as the above. This opens up another argument.
You can wade through the debate and comments under my original post here. This time around, I’m sharing something else someone sent me. An article in The Cowboy Daily out of Wyoming had some interesting insight into the contradictions and consequences of Markey’s bill as currently written.
The Preventing Private Paramilitary Act of 2024 could potentially be used to ban just about any gun-related activity, Cody firearms instructor Bill Tallen told Cowboy State Daily.
Tallen cites several issues, including
- “By strict definition, a militia is “maintained and raised by the state, and must answer to the governor,” Tallen said. So, impromptu groups don’t qualify as actual militias.”
- Markey’s bill is vague and wide open to abuse, he said. For example, it would prohibit any group to “publicly patrol, drill or engage in techniques capable of causing bodily injury or death.” – “That could apply to pressing the trigger on any firearm ever invented,” Tallen said.
- It would allow people to take “civil actions” against those they consider to be armed extremists. “If anybody observes you doing anything that they could construe as a violation of this act, they could file a civil action against you,” he said.
- The bill also would make it unlawful to “interfere with, interrupt or attempt to interfere with or interrupt government operations or a government proceeding.” … “Interrupting” government operations or proceedings is also far too vague, and could be used to trample First Amendment rights, he added.”
He also suggests that tactical training, civilian live fire drills, and perhaps even school skeet shooting programs could become illegal under the legislation as written.
Given how badly this bill is put together, I’m beginning to wonder whether the Feds have some op in place that will result in a timely “militia-like” action (say along the southern border) that is meant to make opponents look bad or catalyze some amended form of Markey’s Bill to advance.
It’s not like that’s never happened before – Project Gun Runner is but one example.
