This feels good, but I’m not encouraged by it. In fact, I think it’s a mistake. To try to define “militia” through an executive order, and to specify only certain weapons as appropriate for a person to own in case s/he has to employ that weapon as part of a “militia” as defined in the Executive Order, is actually limiting, and can become a point of contention that just muddies the waters further. I think this E.O. is a mistake despite it’s (hopefully) good intent.
Read it carefully – it is only an E.O., and therefore not law, yet we just saw a Circuit Court overturn an E.O., despite some solid basis to the E.O., and now that makes it a precedent. Whether the Supremes weigh in or not, and certainly until they do, it is a precedent that can be used against the Administration (or even future administrations) going forward. This “militia” E.O. could end up being the same potential self-laid minefield.