It prohibits a person from teaching, training, or demonstrating to anyone else the use, application, or making of a firearm, explosive, or incendiary device capable of causing injury or death that will be used in or in furtherance of a civil disorder. It also bans a person from assembling with others for such training, instruction or practice.
There are, of course, exemptions for “legitimate law enforcement activity or lawful activity by Norwich University or any other educational institution where military science is taught. it also doesn’t apply to self-defense instruction or practice without the intent of causing a civil disorder; firearms instruction that is intended to teach the safe handling and use of firearms; and any lawful sports or activities like hunting, target shooting and firearms collection.”
Here’s the problem – there are no objective standards when it comes to these sorts of things. All .gov, or it’s busybody fellow travelers, have to do is determine that your activity falls under their prohibitive rubric and…presto…your weekend with your buddies preparing for the zombie apocalypse magically becomes an ‘insurgent training facility’. Watch your head as you duck into the squad car.
We see this sort of threat in the new licensing/registration schemes being promotes as ‘commonsense’ and ‘reasonable’ gun control ‘safety’ laws – establish a requirement and then make the fulfilling of that requirement impossible. For example: to get a firearms permit they may require you to have an approved (keyword) safety training course under your belt. And then they simply deem that no available safety course meets the standard. Since no safety course meets the standard, the permit requirement cannot be met…but thats not a denial of your rights…after all, we’re not saying you can’t have a gun, you just need the approved course certification. And its not our fault theres no qualifying course available.
So, whenever a law like this comes up always ask yourself – how would Hitler use this law to his advantage. Because if there’s even a 1% chance this law can be used heavy-handedly to strip someone of their rights, then its a law that needs to never hit the books. When your right to something is conditional upon another qualifier being met, be extremely cautious….the odds are good that qualifier will then be made unobtainable. A good example is the ‘instant background check’ for gun purchases. Shut the system down for ‘maintenance’ and no one (generally) gets their thundertoy. Or require a license but the license office is only open on the 32nd of each month. Or require that a potential purchase get a signed letter from his local police who may decide that, sorry, we only fill those forms out once a month…see ya in thirty days.
“There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.” – Atlas Shrugged