[Evan Thomas]

OK, here's a longer response...

Originally Posted by TommygunNG

My ideas would make it MORE of a militia than anything we have had in America in generations. But discipline and regulation are the last thing the largely libertarian-minded Second Amendment community wants. And that individualism is why we are suffering the losses we are.

It's not only "the... libertarian-minded Second Amendment community" that doesn't want to be part of such an organization, it's the American people in general.

I don't think one can do better than to quote one our most knowledgeable members on this subject:

Originally Posted by Tennessee Gentleman

...The militia is DEAD. The states and really the American People killed it. The bad truth is that most people do not like the military life and want no part of a compulsory (which it was in 1789) militia. George Washington wrote about it and even the citizen militia champion TJ [Thomas Jefferson] himself was forced to admit that the militia was ill-equipped for war. It was a republican (small r) ideal that never came to pass.

Gun folks want the militia so they can own military weaponry to play with but no one else wants one. Al is right, ask your governor why you can't be in one and he/she will point to the suffering state budget which unlike the Fed MUST be balanced (unless you are CA) and they won't pony up the money.

If you want to hedge against tyranny VOTE! Be politically active and join the NRA. That will do more for freedom than the Tommy Gun in your closet (that you probably don't know how to use in modern combat).
<snip>
The militia spoken of in the 2A were the State Militias and today that is the National Guard. The unorganized militia spoken about in 10 USC 311 is nothing more than a pool of individuals who may be used to fill the ranks of the organized militia which is the National Guard. The unorganized militia has no rights, duties or responsibilities.

Originally Posted by TommygunNG

...sets as official arms those which can be effective by a largely-untrained and undisciplined populace

From the syllabus (summary) accompanying the full text of the Heller decision:

Held:
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
<snip>
United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the [unorganized] militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

The court ruled that there is an individual right to possess any weapon in common use, and that right is independent from service in, much less the perceived needs of, a (hypothetical) organized militia.

So, quite apart from anything else, it appears that what you propose -- restricting the weapons individuals are allowed to possess according to some sort of classification system -- would be unconstitutional under Heller, and implementing it would require Heller to be overturned.

I sincerely don't think we want to go there.