(Admin Mod: abbreviated "United States" in title, in order to meet title size restriction.)
I was active in the Maryland State Guard/Maryland Defense Force for about 15 years. During that time, State Adjudant General and the state Military Department did everything in their power to circumscribe and limit the role of the MDDF. It apeared that they feared that the existance of an effective, State or personally funded State Militia would lead to a reduction in the state’s Army and Air National Guard Federal funding. And they may have been right.
In any event, the MDDF was never an armed unit. Some states had armed State Militias. Florida and Lousisian had State Militias which embarassed their respective ARNG units by being able to turn out in an emergency faster and better equipt because the Federally funded units had to wait for FEMA evaluation of the situation and NG Bureau approval before mustering with their US Government Issued equipment.
It seemed to me then, and it seems to me now, that the states should organise State Defense Forces trained and equipt for the full range of emergency duties for which they had in the past and might in the future be required: security duties in emergencies; riot control; engineering support in natural disasters; search and rescue; and so on. The limiting factor is cost. Few States could afford to outfit a large, fully uniformed and equipt defense Force. Traditionally, each militiaman was expectected to provide his own weapons and uniforms; and that was the case in the MDDF. That might work, in a limited manner, if the Federal Firearms Acts and the Surplus Property Demilitarization Act were voided for State Defense Force members. Fat chance of that!
I refuse to romanticize about civil war and SHTF scenarios and the
kumbuhya survival yearnings some dream about.
If you want to rough it, go camping without a tent.
bfl