Current Montana bill to revitalize militia

Discussion in '2nd Amendment' started by perotter, Feb 13, 2015.

  1. A bill(SB0130) has been introduced in the Montana senate to revitalize it's state militia.

    http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2015/billpdf/SB0130.pdf

    It's fairly long, but one thing of interest:

    "A home guard company may be established as provided in [section 25] and may be formed as an infantry company, medical company, transportation company, heavy equipment company, construction company,forestry company, police company,environmental company, signal company, scout company, cavalry company,supply company, specialty company, general service company, or another type of company. A mixed company may be formed of specialized platoons or squads of the types listed in this subsection."

    "A home guard company must be commanded by a captain commissioned by the governor. The company captain is responsible for selecting and commissioning the company's officers and for recruiting, training, mustering,equipping, assigning, and promoting company members. The company captain may dismiss or demote company members or administer lesser disciplinary measures."

    IMO, not a perfect bill, but it is big step in the right direction. Hopefully any forum member who live there and support the 2nd will contact their leg members.

    FWIW. This bill is similar to one that pass in one house there a couple of years ago. This one is better. Note that the don't use the word militia.
     
  2. I spent a little checking into this some more & thinking about it. I listened to a hearing on it also.

    1. I found out that the Sen. Webb got letters from 2 groups that want to enroll if this passes. The total number in these 2 groups is 11,000. A little over 1% of the population. So likely to get 2%-5% of the population to join.

    2. Not really many people willing to speak at the hearing.

    3. The bill maybe doesn't have enough detail in it, based on what was asked at the hearing. There was a reason the old militia laws were a few pages long.

    4. A couple of good points about if being organized only up to the company level, there could be organizational problems.
     

  3. In the hearing one of the concerns was how citizens could or would be able to id active militiamen. IMO, that is proper concern.

    Here is the only thing that is said in the law about a uniform, etc:

    "(3) Each home guard company may adopt a company flag, a company creed, company colors, and other designations or insignia suitable for company identity and tradition. The company shall agree on a uniform to distinguish its members. A uniformly worn special badge with a company insignia or a readily available clothing item, such as a cap, shirt, or other item, is sufficient to constitute a uniform."

    This doesn't provide for a statewide and universal method to id them. In a perfect state militia law there should be at least a required universal armband(etc) that is worn when active.
     
  4. TNTRAILERTRASH

    TNTRAILERTRASH Supporting Member

    Isn't every 18yo or older gun owning male in the US subject to call up by their governor? We know Montana doesn't want to secede to Canada!
     
  5. It depends on the state.

    There isn't a state that can only call up gun owners. Many states have a cut off by age, normally between 45 & 65. Many states can call up women also. There are also some people who are excluded from being called and that can vary from state to state. Here in MN, it's 18-64 and women can be called up also.

    Montana currently doesn't have the organized militia that the 2nd says a state must have. This bill is just an attempt to start doing the minimum that a state is required to do to be in complacence with the US Constitution.

    I don't know what you mean about Montana not wanting to secede.
     
  6. Think1st

    Think1st Supporting Member

    8,752
    2,232
    Florida
    It seems that organizing a militia up to the company level probably makes each unit more feasible to form and maintain. Militias typically are representative of local communities, given the voluntary nature of them, and depending on how big a company is (100-300?), getting much bigger than that could easily end up spreading members over a pretty large geographical area.

    When working with volunteers, a commander would be more effective if he didn't have his company spread over three or four counties. The looser the organization, the smaller and more tightly located the want it and its members to be.

    The companies should definitely have some kind of insignia that distinctively displays their affiliation at the state level, as well as at the company level.
     
  7. Liberty

    Liberty Shhh! Lifetime Supporter

    I hope this passes. Then other states can follow and start telling the Feds to jump off about the "militia" bans.
     
  8. A company used to 40-80 members years ago. If they dropped down to 20-25 for a few years they normally where disband and the member could join other companies.

    A good case could be made for the companies to be part of a battalion. Largely for reasons of administration, sharing trainer and sharing resources. The papierkreig continuous. But I don't see a need, at this point in time, for them to be deployed as a battalion. Larger than a battalion adds a lot of administrative over head.
     
  9. There is one big thing that does bug me that I think they changed from their current law. But I'll have to reread current Montana militia law and the bill to make sure I my thinking is correct on this.

    There are several other thing that should be address in it to overcome some concerns that were brought up in the committee hearing.

    I'll list them as I get time. The reason being so that when we get one introduced here it will be both good and passable. There are advantages in not being the 1st.

    PS
    I'm definetly not against the current bill being made law, as it would be wonderful to have even one state with a militia again.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2015
  10. TNTRAILERTRASH

    TNTRAILERTRASH Supporting Member

    What I meant was Montana wouldn't want to join up with Canada.

    Italy only has 5000 in their army? They better change their gun laws and build and army quick. Canada needs to re-evaluate their gun laws pretty quick.
     
  11. "NEW SECTION. Section 29. Activation and deployment -- failure to respond -- restrictions. (1) A home guard company may be activated and assigned to duty by order of the governor or on the request of a county sheriff if the requested activation is approved and ordered by the governor within 48 hours of the request. The governor or the county sheriff shall provide written documentation of the activation order to the company."

    Add the following as many state had this in the old militia laws and provides a little more flexibility. Normally these elected officials had to be from adjoining counties.

    or activated by 3 elected officials in the area of the emergency.
     
  12. (2) The governor may make available to the home guard the facilities of state armories and their equipment and any other state land and property as that may be available. The governor may requisition from the federal government, for the use of the home guard, arms, ammunition, clothing, equipment, and other items in accordance with federal law and regulations to the extent that the governor may do so without obligating the home guard to federal service. The governing body of a county, municipality, or school district may make available to the home guard any premises, facilities, equipment, or other property belonging to or under the control of the county, municipality, or school district."

    Change "may make available" to "shall/must make available when not being used for other purposes".
     
  13. Add a section as to when the militia may use force. Keeps things clear for everyone and if they are the same as for the NG then if it changes, it only has to be done in one place. Something like this:

    The rules for the use of force by the militia shall be the same as those used by the National Guard.
     
  14. NEW SECTION. Section 24. Company captain responsibilities -- commissioning and recruiting members -- charter. (1) A home guard company must be commanded by a captain commissioned by the governor. The company captain is responsible for selecting and commissioning the company's officers and for recruiting, training, mustering, equipping, assigning, and promoting company members. The company captain may dismiss or demote company members or administer lesser disciplinary measures.

    There should be a minimum list what arms, equipment, supplies are allowed and/or needed. Also some minimum training requirements.

    Things along these lines this:
    1. Each company shall have communication equipment the functions with that of the sheriff's dept, Red Cross, etc.
    2. Each member of a company shall have a flash lite, canteen, etc.
    3. One third of each company shall have complete a Red Cross CPR class.