The 2A social media sphere has been upset by a proposed federal law against privately organized paramilitary and militia activities in the United States. The problem with this bill is that it could be interpreted as prohibiting perfectly normal self-defense training.

Montana already has such a law in place (as do most states) in MCA 45-8-109, but it has a common sense exception for firearms training:

(g) a facility, program, or lawful activity related to firearms instruction or training intended to teach the safe handling and use of firearms or activities or sports related to recreational use or possession of firearms.

There is no reason to have an overly broad federal law that is already handled by the states. Do you really want the feds involved in your Security Team Training for Churches? It’s bad enough that the FBI has been going after Catholics. Imagine what the feds could do with a law that makes it illegal to train in a group? Rest assured, that proposed law won’t be used against Antifa, although what they’re doing is precisely what the law is trying to stop. Go away feds, the states have this handled.

The true meaning of the word “militia” has been lost. It now connotes extremist white supremacy. Citizens who want to exercise their God-given rights and duties to defend life and extend liberty need to come up with another term.

The anti-gun people are always telling us that the prefatory clause of the Second Amendment limits its meaning. Now they’re telling us that a well regulated militia itself can be banned. It’s hard to keep up. How can these anti-militia laws hold up under a Bruen analysis?