Congress Must Probe Frightening Militias : Urgent hearings are needed to get at truth of these groups

Following the Oklahoma bombing, Americans justifiably are concerned about the growing presence of a movement that is filled with firearms and hate for the government. But for reasons that escape common sense, some in Congress seem to be treating the problem of the militias with at best indifference and at worst tacit encouragement.

An act of domestic terrorism as hideous as the April attack clearly warrants the keenest attention of Congress; immediate hearings--including examination of possible militia involvement--would be a logical starting point.

Yet instead of dealing with the subject at hand, House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) proposes to revisit the controversial 1993 federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Texas. How does that address the problem of violence-prone militia members? By contrast, since the blast at the Oklahoma City federal building, Rep. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has been pushing the House to call much-needed hearings on paramilitary groups.

Organizations that track the militias point to a sharp increase in their activities across the nation. Confined at one time primarily to the West, the militias now have about 100,000 members spread over 30 states.

Many within these armed-to-the-teeth outfits claim they are merely exercising their rights to bear arms and to free speech and assembly. But when it comes to hateful rhetoric, words are one thing and action is another--and it’s clear that some militia sympathizers have a problem distinguishing the two. That’s what Congress has to probe.

Many paramilitary members cite the Second Amendment as a ground for their activities, but the Bill of Rights speaks of a “well-regulated militia,” not gunslingers who congregate around self-appointed generals. Two dozen states including California now have laws that ban paramilitary training of civilians that involves practicing with weapons for the purpose of warfare or sabotage. Over the weekend even Wayne R. LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Assn., apparently feeling the need to put some distance between the gun organization and militias, expressed support for congressional hearings.

A number of key questions loom in the national consciousness. Is there any link between the Oklahoma bombing suspects and the militia movement? How extensive is the network of these groups? Have militias conspired to commit violence?

Answers are demanded, and soon.

The people of the United States have low tolerance for groups that claim to speak for the millions but in fact are pushing the agendas of a hate-filled few. The Oklahoma bombing killed 167 people. Could the federal government have done anything that would justify the slaughter of innocent civilians, including babies in a day care center? Does dissatisfaction with one’s government make it OK to murderously prey on fellow Americans?

Congress of course should take care to do nothing that compromises rights. But it also has an obligation to expose outlaw extremists, even those who claim to be patriots. At the very least it must ensure that their “patriotism” doesn’t spill over into violence, such as that which last month stunned an entire nation and the world.