by Paul Engel, American Thinker:

Congress is considering legislation called “The Preventing Private Paramilitary Act of 2024”. It should be called the “Disarming the Militia Act,” but that is exactly what this legislation would do. Apparently not happy with how recent attempts to disarm law-abiding citizens, they’re now afraid that the American people might be prepared to defend themselves, even against Congress.

TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

Have these members of Congress forgotten that our war of independence was started by an attempt by the British governor of Massachusetts to disarm the people? That the the battles of Lexington and Concord were fought by private citizens who formed a militia? Or could it be that they just don’t care about our rights and the Constitution and are just looking for another way to subjugate the American people?

Sometimes, I wonder if there are those in Congress actually trying to start a new war of independence? I only ask because it seems there are some in that body who seem dead set on repeating the mistakes the British made back in the 18th century. Take, for example, the battles of Lexington and Concord.

Battle of Lexington

After a decade of tension between the British government and the American Colonies, the Commander-in-Chief of the British forces in North America, Thomas Gage, was given the authority to use force to find and destroy military supplies. On April 18, 1775, General Gage ordered approximately 800 British troops to march to Concord to destroy weapons and ammunition he believed were hidden there. When the patriots in Boston learned of the orders, they dispatched Paul Revere and William Dawes to ride to Concord, warning those they could along the way. By the early hours of April 19th, the local militia, under the command of Captain John Parker, had assembled on Lexington Green. At dawn, the British troops, under the command of Lieutenant John Pitcairn, marched into Lexington. Lt. Pitcairn ordered Parker and his men to drop their weapons and disperse. A shot rang out, from which side no one truly knows, but once it did, both sides opened fire. This “shot heard ’round the world” was the beginning of open combat between the British and Americans.

The actions of General Gage and Lt. Pitcairn were not intended to start a war, but they did. The desire of tyrants to disarm their subjects did not start in the American colonies, but the fight against such usurpation is certainly part of our American DNA. Our right to keep and bear arms have been enshrined in the Second Amendment, along with our need for a militia. Or, as these members of Congress wish to call them, “Private Paramilitary Activity.”

Preventing Private Paramilitary Activity Act of 2024

Ever since 1934 and the passing of the National Firearms Act, Congress and the federal government as a whole have claimed the power to infringe on your right to keep and bear arms because they think they know best. Certain weapons were too dangerous for private use, and certain places were too dangerous for you to defend yourself. And now, with the introduction of the Private Paramilitary Activity Act of 2024, Congress wants to tell you that certain groups are too dangerous to be armed.

(a) Offense.—It shall be unlawful to knowingly, in a circumstance described in subsection (b), while acting as part of or on behalf of a private paramilitary organization and armed with a firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or other dangerous weapon—

“(1) publically patrol, drill, or engage in techniques capable of causing bodily injury or death;

“(2) interfere with, interrupt, or attempt to interfere with or interrupt government operations or a government proceeding;

“(3) interfere with or intimidate another person in that person’s exercise of any right under the Constitution of the United States;

“(4) assume the functions of a law enforcement officer, peace officer, or public official, whether or not acting under color of law, and thereby assert authority or purport to assert authority over another person without the consent of that person; or

Read More @ AmericanThinker.com