Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our
community around the world.

Firearm and Gun Forums Firearm and Gun Forums Firearms With a bill introduced to Virginia’s state legislator that bans paramilitary/militia training, wouldn’t it be in violation of the 1st Amendment?

  • With a bill introduced to Virginia’s state legislator that bans paramilitary/militia training, wouldn’t it be in violation of the 1st Amendment?

     Trent updated 11 months, 3 weeks ago 2 Members · 2 Posts
  • Trent

    Member
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Here’s an article covering the [Legislative Bill](https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/virginia-bill-to-make-firearms-training-an-illegal-paramilitary-activity-and-felony/)

    Just from skimming over the definitions regarding, a “militia” and “paramilitary”, I’m convinced that these terms are related. That being said, wouldn’t these “anti-paramilitary” laws be unconstitutional due to the freedom of assembly being infringed?

    Unless I’m missing something, what makes a civilian militia or paramilitary force illegal, and still capable of passing constitutional scrutiny?

  • CVMASheepdog

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    This is just an attempt to say “Well we banned militia training so militias don’t exist, therefore the 2A doesn’t necessarily apply here” So we can ban whatever we want.

    This is just another throw anti-2A stuff against the wall and see whats sticks to chip away at civilian gun ownership and press to remove it entirely.

  • ExtremeFreedom

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Militia is protected by the second, these people are retarded. Also every private military contractor the government uses would be in violation, and many of them are based in VA…

  • ntvirtue

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Weapons are my religion

  • Shotgun_Rain

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    *”A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”*

    I’m surprised these people can form a proper sentence. First it’s “well the founding fathers meant militias, not normal people” (even though they were just your average citizen). Now they say “no militias guys, that’s paramilitary activity”. No fucking shit.

    This shit actually pisses me off, it’s pretty fucking clear what their intentions are and always have been. Fuck them and their unconstitutional bullshit, I’m in my early damned twenties and it’s abso-fucking-lutely ridiculous I have to worry that my kid won’t be able to go buy an AR-15 when he turns 18.

    My final closing statement for this comment, fuck you and the red coat you flew in on. Eat my entire ass.

  • BENboBEN

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    When has The Constitution stopped them before? 1934, 1968, 1994 all happened and held up in court. They don’t give half a shit.

  • MrTHORN74

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    If they are willing to violate the 2nd what makes you think they give a shit about any other amendment or the Constitution as a whole

  • MiyegomboBayartsogt

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Leftists say that only people in ‘well-regulated militias’ have a right to keep and bear arms. Then these same leftists will turn around and claim that being in a militia should be against the law.

    When governments fear the people, the government is a tyranny and needs to be abolished with extreme prejudice.

  • Oneshoeleroy

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    They don’t care about the Constitution. There’s now been open threats of mobilizing the National Guard. Either someone backs down, or a lot of messy shit is going to happen.

  • brotherjustincrowe

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    At this point I think that’s the point. They want to see how much they can drag their balls all over the Constitution before We The People stand up and object.

  • So_Full_Of_Fail

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    I’m surprised, with the lobbying budgets of all the DoD contractors based in VA, that this is a thing.

  • DanTheMountainMan02

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Wasn’t there a supreme Court case that basically said that a state law banning militias was completely constitutional?

    Edit: The case I’m referring to is Presser v Illinois.

  • ratatine

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    This is pretty much the same as what the Republicans do when they get a majority and go after abortion. Basically they are writing a whole bunch of laws not caring about the constitutionality and want to use it like a political cudgel to increase campaign donations. “Look! We’re fighting for you!”

    Such crap.

  • s0briquet

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    If you want a little more insight into the Second Amendment, and what it means, (Don’t mind the silly man in the goofy costume) [check out this](https://www.facebook.com/stevencrowderofficial/videos/2308139059504122/)

  • pyratemime

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    The first text of the bill quoted in the article makes me wonder about what jeopardy there is for anyone partcipating in Title 32 training for the National Guard. Particularly as it relates to the recent comments from VA legislators on the use of the NG to impose the states will on the elected or appointed officials of counties and cities committed to opposing unconstitutional laws.

    >“A person is guilty of unlawful paramilitary activity, punishable as a Class 5 felony if he: 1. Teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that such training will be employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder”

    The above specifies teaching techniques capable of causing injury or death and to be used in the furtherance of civil disorder.

    If a NG unit, which in Title 32 status is *not* part of the US Military but instead acting as the state militia conducts training for which they know or have reason to suspect will be used against sworn law enforcement officers of the state is that not teaining which could result in injury or death in furtherance of civil disorder?

    Given that Title 32 Guardsman are not legally part of the military are they not by definition paramilitaries?

    Could be interesting to see how that plays out in a court of law.

  • functionoverform

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    Time to refresh the tree of liberty again.

  • Poprocketrop

    Guest
    December 13, 2019 at 10:15 am

    The photo used in the post is a range I go to often. Cary on.

Reply to: Trent
Your information:

Cancel
Original Post
0 of 0 posts June 2018
Now